Glenn Greenwald on Rachel Maddow discusses Democratic crooks Lieberman and Bayh

Glenn Greenwald on Rachel Maddow explains why Senators Evan Bayh and Joe Lieberman are ready to destroy health care reform for their own personal gain.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Please note the system described by Greenwald where Senatorial families rake is large dollars by selling influence to the highest bidder is widespread. Essentially hubby gets into the Senate and then wifey sells her name and her husband's ear to large corporations for large $'s into their joint checking account. Its just a different way to market and profit from influence peddling. Certainly it is business as usual in both the Senate and the House. We in New Mexico don't have to look any farther than our own Senator Jeff Bingaman to see the same game being played.

Finally a Progressive group calls Obama out on Health Care Reform

Its been clear to me for quite some time that Obama was the Public Option's real enemy in the Democratic Party. Finally other folks are starting to see this - thanks to the Progressive Change Campaign Committee for calling Obama out on this.

Thank God - she done gone and said it-

Finally, someone in the mainstream press has put in print what has been obvious to me, a Southern Expatriate, for quite a few months. Racism is alive and well in the United States and the proof is easy to see. It ranges from the Birthers, to the Deathers, to the screams and shouts over Obama's address to school children last Tuesday reaching a crescendo with Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst last Wednesday night. Maureen Dowd has finally said it. These are the words that broke the silence of the mainstream press:

Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.

As she rightly points out what Wilson really said wasn't just "You lie!" but rather "You lie, boy!". Certainly that's what my Southern ears actually heard. Its no coincidence that the first President to be heckled in a joint session of Congress was also the first black President and that the first heckler was a Southern Republican.

Unfortunately, Maureen hasn't made the final leap to a deeper understanding of the situation. I grew up in the 60's South and watched the old racist Southern Democrats become Republicans. They didn't loose their racism when they left the Democratic Party rather it was because of their racism that they became Republicans. Unfortunately the Republican Party greeted the racists with open arms and has never looked back. Nor has it ever challenged the racists in its midst as it slowly adopted their view as its own. Thus, in a sad historical twist the party of Lincoln has become their natural home. Racism is the reason the South moved from the Democratic to the Republican Party and while polite people do not speak of it and they work hard to hide it those views and attitudes are still there. Taken to a larger whole, racism is a defining element in the world view of a real and sizable percentage of the Republican base and it shouldn't surprise anybody that it shows its ugly face from time to time. As Dowd rightly concludes the fact that Obama is a literate, well spoken black man only tends to make matters worse. To paraphrase her, a good chunk of the racist Republican base simply can't cope with the fact that a black man is President.

Insurance Companies love mandates

Simple logic - wish Obama understood it!

Another YouTube goodie found via Jesus General

Mandates are a disaster

The DailyKos, normally blind to actions and real intent of the Obama Administration, is starting to get a clue. They seem to now understand that the individual mandates in the Baucus Health Reform bill that would force people to pay a monthly tribute to the Health Insurance Deities are a disaster for the Democratic Party. Since the insurance they will be forced to buy will most certainly be junk the mandate will be wildly unpopular with the voters and the Democratic Party will rightly be blamed for them. Here's a link to the post and the important paragraphs:

"Under the Baucus plan, nothing would force the industry to compete for these new customers. Industry would effectively hold them hostage. The only proposal that's out there to provide the competition this system needs is the public option, and without it, the public will be held hostage to the whims of the private insurance industry.

The problem here isn't the notion of a mandate. A mandate -- or something like it -- is an essential part of reform because it requires everybody to take responsibility for the risks they impose on the system. But when the mandate forces people to buy private health insurance without offering an alternative, you have a situation that is untenable, and would quickly turn into a monumental political disaster for the Democratic Party."

However, the following paragraph shows that they really don't totally understand what's happening yet:

"The upcoming days and weeks will be the biggest test so far as to whether progressives in the House and Senate will be able to stick together to achieve meaningful change -- or whether they will simply roll over and cave once again to the special interests who own senators like Max Baucus and Kent Conrad."

Now, if they could just understand that Baucus and Conrad aren't acting on their own - they are just doing the bidding of the Obama administration we will really be getting somewhere. Obama is out enemy not the two stooges - Baucus and Conrad.

UnitedHealth lobbyist does fundraiser for Pelosi

Frankly I never liked her anyway - I always though she was incompetent but now it appears she's just another Congressional Criminal on top of that. What bigger signal do we need that the public option is dead?

Go to David Sirota's article on OpenLeft for the sickening details.

Mr Abelson - obviously not from this time/space dimension

This morning while I was wolfing down an incredible breakfast burrito at Bee's #1 I just about gagged when I encountered Reed Abelson's article on page A16 of today's NY Times.

Its really hard to know where to begin. The title alone is enough to cause any sane person to upchuck - "President’s Speech Allays Some Fears in the Health Insurance Industry". It only got worse from there. The first paragraph makes me wonder which time/space dimension Abelson has occupied for the last several months:

"During the summer’s heated discussions over health care, when Democrats seemed quick to portray the health insurance companies as the system’s main villains, the industry seemed to be in policy makers’ cross hairs."

What??? They are villians - Obama never layed a glove on them (that's a big part of the problem) and the Senate that they own didn't go after them either. Then continuing on Abelson says:

"But as the specifics of Washington’s proposed overhaul have emerged in recent days — from Senator Max Baucus and in President Obama’s speech on Wednesday night — some industry analysts say insurers may not have much to fear.

“The outlook is moving away from the worst case,” said Les Funtleyder, who follows the industry for the investment firm Miller Tabak & Company in New York.

Even Mr. Obama, who had recently stepped up his criticism of the industry, seemed to soften his stance on Wednesday. He recounted a few insurance horror stories — as might be politically necessary when arguing the need for a system makeover. But as he outlined his plans for health care, which focused mainly on a revamping of the nation’s insurance system, he was careful to point out that the executives who run those companies were not “bad people.” "

Not "bad people"? Those that make millions or hundreds of millions by denying care to premium paying customers aren't really "bad people"? But there's more:

"Some industry executives on Thursday acknowledged the president’s shift in tone. “The rhetoric seemed to be much more positive,” said Ronald A. Williams, the chief executive of Aetna, one of the nation’s largest health insurers.

The reality may also be much more favorable to insurers, industry analysts said. Mr. Obama has already agreed to grant one of the industry’s dearest wishes: a requirement that everyone have coverage, which is reflected in the proposals in Congress."

You can read the rest on your own I don't have the stomach for it.

I'm confused- how could the same person that wrote this article have written this one about people who went bankrupt even while insured or this one on essentially the same topic. Just amazing how can Abelson at one moment report facts and the next write a piece like this or this which are essentially the stuff of Insurance Lobbyist wet dreams.

Obama's speech -

Hmmmmmm -------

Re: Obama's speech - well nothing that will change the dynamics of Health Care Reform debate much. A few folks that weren't listening for the last several months may have gotten some facts but besides the outburst of Rep. Joe Wilson not much news. The only thing that got a response out of me was Obama's promise to "call out lies". Well that's nice - it would have been really helpful if he had started that a couple of months ago.

For another take see David Sirota's post. He makes several good points.

A great post on Baucus' Health Care proposal (disaster) at consumerwatchdog.org:

A 'framework' made in health insurer's workshop

Posted by Judy Dugan

The latest proposal in the Washington health reform debate protects a lot of groups. Employers get protection from cost, paying very little if they don't offer insurance. Insurers get millions of new customers and protection from effective competition. Overall medical cost reduction is vague (Can you say "pilot program?"). The middle class, the group with no free-spending Washington lobby, gets the lump of coal--less help with premiums and higher out of pocket costs than in other proposals.

Today's new plan is just a set of ideas labeled "Framework for Comprehensive Health Reform." But its author, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has become the center of power in health reform.

The plan Baucus has in mind is suited to a small-state legislator who reaps big contributions from the health industry--health-related companies and their employees gave Baucus's political committees nearly $1.5 million in 2007 and 2008 alone. My colleague Jerry Flanagan earlier described one of the worst features of the Baucus "Framework"--insurance companies can weasel out of state-level protections for consumers and patients--things like required maternity benefits and state reviews of benefit denials.

The numbers in the plan also raise consumers' costs. First, there is no direct premium subsidy for famiies making more than $66,000 a year. And the basic ("Bronze") plan would have to cover only 65% of the average cost (the "actuarial value") of all medical claims that are covered by the plan--never mind care that isn't covered. That, of course, leaves the patient on the hook for the other 35% on average, on top of the cost of the premium. That means very high copays and deductibles. And 65% is exactly the level that the insurance industry demanded of Congress.

As for the premium costs, families that don't get a subsidy could be charged up to 13% of family income for the premium alone, based on second-most-modest ("Silver") policy. That's $10,400 for a family of five with income of $80,000. On top of that, the family could end up with out of pocket costs in the high thousands. If insurers also get to dump state regulation, the family may also get much less in the way of benefits--meaning they won't really understand how worthless their coverage is until they file a claim.

What we're seeing in Congress is a health reform plan that comes down to what the insurance industry and some of its allies want. It's still a system driven by profit, not health. It's not not what American families need. It won't fundamentally reform the fragmented and wasteful way that health care is delivered. The Baucus plan may be better than nothing, but it's far from what other nations offer, and far from what Americans deserve.

The Baucus plan stinks - it really stinks. The process stinks too -

A warning from Josh Marshall

Words of caution that I don't think anybody is hearing from Josh Marshall on Talking Points Memo:

Where's This Going?
Josh Marshall | September 7, 2009, 10:31AM

Am I the only one who thinks that if the Dems pass a bill with mandates and subsidies for poor and moderate income people to purchase it but no public option or competition with the insurers, that it will be pretty much a catastrophe for the Democrats in political terms?

You 'solve' the problem of the uninsured by passing a law forcing them to buy health insurance which, by definition, most a) cannot afford or b) are gambling they won't need because they're young and healthy. Either you end up with low subsidies which still leave it onerous to buy, thus creating a lot of disgruntled people, or you get generous subsidies, which cost a lot of money.

It's sort of like reform with all the cool political downsides but none of the reform.

Of course, political terms are not the only calculus on which to evaluate these questions. And the model I'm describing sounds more or less like the system they have in Switzerland and Massachusetts, which many health care experts I have a lot of respect for still believe would be a big improvement over the current situation. But I do wonder whether, if the details are not thought through carefully, you might not end up with a system less effective at driving down costs than driving down the number of Democrats serving in Congress.

The dangers of caving

Something else from OpenLeft that needs to be seen -

Ultimately the take home lesson is that if we cave there is nothing to prevent the worst of the worst health care bills from becoming law.

A good rant by David Sirota

Earlier today David Sirota threw a good rant on the state of things at Open Left. After discussing a Wall Street Journal article that contains the memorable and unfortunately true line:

"How bitter it must be to discover that the Fox News Channel's Glenn Beck, who drove the debate about Mr. Jones, counts for more at this White House than Mr. Sirota."

Sirota goes on to say:

"Progressives don't just "believe" they deserve a seat at the table - we actually do deserve that seat, not just because we worked to elect this president, but because our stance on major issues like the public option, climate change, Wall Street reform and the war are the majoritarian positions in America. That's not speculation - polls show that's an empirical fact.

But we won't get that seat at the table unless we demand it. That means the Washington-based progressive groups have to stop kissing the White House's ass and selling out their grassroots membership. It means rank-and-file Obama supporters have to stop framing legitimate progressive pressure on Obama as some sort of disloyal desire to see Mitt Romney elected President in 2012.

It means, as I said in my last newspaper column, that we have to start thinking and acting like a real movement, and not just like sycophantic political partisans. If we do that, we'll get that seat at the table - and more importantly, we'll get the legislative results Obama originally promised, but now hesitates to champion."

This too is sadly true and I fear Sirota's pleas and observations will fall on deaf ears.

Frankly I sense that's Sirota's plea is as much about Health Care reform and the public option as anything else. I really believe we are fast approaching the "end game" in this mess and that he senses Progressives will ultimately cave.

Just love those fundamentalist -

They really can be a laugh a minute. For example I was howling earlier today when I read this:

Kristin Maguire, South Carolina's Board of Education Chairwoman, resigned on August 31 siting "family matters", but the real reason might be her secret hobby as an erotica writer under the pen name Bridget Keeney. Kristin Maguire, a professed Christian, was one of South Carolina's most respected social conservatives who had served on the board for 9 years since 2000. She has been a strong supporter of abstinence only sex education.

From a 2003 web page some of her more entertaining titles are:

Title -- Description
A Great Ride -- Taking the edge off of your appetite.
Lauren's Masturbatory Musings -- Lauren reveals her fantasies to Paul.
Locker Room Recreation -- Couple enjoys all the hotel's amenities.
Man of the Year -- Lauren gives her 'Man of the Year' what he's always wanted.
Penumbra -- Kurt & Bridget come out of shadow of mutual loss.
Tara's Thanksgiving Weekend Ch. 1 -- Tara has an appetizer on her way to dinner.
Thanksgiving Weekend Ch. 2 -- Tara gets a massage and more.
Thanksgiving Weekend Ch. 3 -- Tara gets her first taste of Sandy.
Thanksgiving Weekend Ch. 4 -- Tara is the main course for two brothers.
Wife of the Year -- Lauren proves she isn't just a trophy bride.

If South Carolina keeps it up they might start to rival Texas as as the primo right-winged loony bin of the South.

Update: Over at FITSNEWS.COM they have dredged up a couple of Bridget Keeney's literary efforts for your entertainment.

Update 2: From GAWKER because they read 'em and I just can't resist myself:

It would be hard for those groups to ignore Maguire's alleged prose, like a tale entitled "Continental Cuisine," which features a woman blowing a man while his pal wanks one off. (Sample line: "The rhythmic sway of the train car added to the bobbing of my head as I sucked deeply.")

Another tale goes by the name, "Lauren's Masturbatory Musings." You can only imagine what that one concerns. Both are available at FITSNews' site and are quite tawdry, trashy and downright raunchy, which means they're great.

H.P. Lovecraft on Republicans

A friend just sent me this excerpt from one of SciFi writer H. P. Lovecraft letters. While it was written in 1936 it's still a wonderfully perceptive and clear view of what Republicans are today. Read and be amazed:

“As for the Republicans—how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical ‘American heritage’…) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.”

Texas please just go -

The sooner the better! To bad time travel ain't possible - yesterday would be lots better than today.

Take your stupidity and racism and just go -

Even the New Republic is pissed!

Wow! Glory Glory Hallelujah!!! Even the New Republic is pissed with the Blue Dogs and Corporate Democrats and their attempts to destroy Health Care reform.

The magazine I usually refer to as The New Republican has for years been the supporter of the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Finally they have started to see the light. Last Thursday Glenn Greenwald showed the beginning of the New Republic's rehabilitation from a corporate flack to what it historically was - the spokesmag of the Left. However there is much work yet to be done. I leave it to Greenwald to explain where the New Republic's thinking still stinks:

While it's lovely that The New Republic has now joined that movement and decided that corporate-owned "centrists" need to be purged from the Party, Chait is laboring under complete blindness about the reasons these problems have arisen. Chait accuses me, Dan Froomkin and "liberals" generally of "confusion" because we believe that the Obama White House bears some of the blame in the dominance of corporate interests generally and in the health care battle specifically. Chait echoes the facially absurd excuse of the most hardened Obama loyalists everywhere: namely, that Obama, Rahm Emanuel and friends are just helpless, impotent observers who wield no influence over the health care debate and can do nothing but sit back and hope and pray that the Senate will pass a good, progressive health care reform bill free of excessive servitude to the health care and drug industries. If the Congress refuses to, well that's obviously not Obama's fault -- a President isn't in the Congress and can't really influence what it does, so this excuse-making goes.

For the moment, leave aside all the evidence to the contrary: that, as Chait's colleague Jonathan Cohn detailed, the Obama White House secretly entered into a deal with the drug industry not to negotiate for lower prices; that Obama has repeatedly sought to empower the Baucus-dominated Senate Finance Committee at the expense of more progressive committees; that the White House aggressively threatens, berates, and cajoles House progressives who impede the President's agenda but hasn't done anything against Blue Dogs; that the strategy of the White House from the start has been to ensure that the health care and drug industries are pleased so that they continue to use their ample largesse to fund the Democrats rather than get behind a GOP takeover in 2010; and that Emanuel built his career and power base by controlling the Congress through the expansion of the Blue Dogs and other "centrist" and "conservative" members and by pleasing corporate donors, thus rendering the image of him as a helpless, passive bystander in the health care debate transparent fiction. Even Dick Durbin -- the Senate's number two Democrat -- acknowledges that, even with a huge Democratic majority, the banking industry "frankly owns" the Congress.

More important than all of that is the fact that there is one principal reason that Blue Dogs and "centrists" exert such dominance within the Party: because the Party leadership, led by the Obama White House, wants it that way and works hard to ensure it continues. While Chait seems to envision himself as the pioneering inventor of the primary challenge strategy (something he first articulated six weeks ago), Accountability Now has actually been working continuously for the last year on recruiting credible primary challengers and building an infrastructure to support those challenges -- all in order to unseat the unresponsive, corrupt and corporate-owned incumbents who ensure that the same factions control government no matter which party is in control. But the principal barrier to those efforts has been the accurate perception that the White House and President -- along with key party institutions such as the DCCC -- will use their vast resources to keep Blue Dogs and "centrists" in office and crush any efforts from within the party to unseat them.

It's hard to overstate how many promising potential primary challengers with whom we've spoken -- highly energized and impressive members of City Councils or County Commissions or state legislatures or just private citizens -- who are eager to run against their corporate-owned Democratic Congressional incumbent but are deterred by one primary fear: that Obama and the Party infrastructure will undercut their efforts by actively supporting the Blue Dog incumbent. That fear is particularly pronounced for potential African-American challengers in districts where the corporate-serving "centrist" incumbent is wildly out of step with the interests and views of the typical (and sometimes overwhelmingly African-American) Democratic voter. Such potential challengers anticipate that Obama will intervene on behalf of the Blue Dog against the progressive challenger -- as he's done before -- and sabotage not only their primary challenge but perhaps their future viability as a candidate in their community and district.

That's what makes Chait's insistence that the Obama White House is just an innocent, impotent bystander in all of this so painfully naive and wrong (Obama says he wants a public option, so doesn't that settle it?, asks Chait, vacantly batting his eyes with child-like trust and innocence). When the White House genuinely wants a bill to pass -- rather than paying irrelevant lip service to it -- they know how to apply pressure on the defiant members of Congress

The White House is playing hardball with Democrats who intend to vote against the supplemental war spending bill, threatening freshmen who oppose it that they won't get help with reelection and will be cut off from the White House, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said Friday.

"We're not going to help you. You'll never hear from us again," Woolsey said the White House is telling freshmen.

Rahm Emanuel, Tom Delay, and the Bush/Cheney White House have left no doubt that where there's a will to influence the actions of Senators and House members in one's own party, there's a way. But the Obama White House has done nothing in the way of attempting to change the behavior of the supposedly obstructionist Blue Dogs and centrists whom Obama-defenders are eager to blame for the health care standstill. In fact, they've done the opposite: Emanuel has repeatedly leapt to their defense and attacked progressives who sought to influence or otherwise put pressure on them to change behavior. White House threats that "you'll never hear from us again" are issued to defiant progressives only. Not only are such threats never issued to "centrists" and Blue Dogs who are supposedly impeding the President's health care agenda, but the White House does everything it can to protect those ostensible obstructionists and further entrench them in power. Isn't all of this fairly strong evidence that the White House knew, accepted and likely even desired from the start that -- despite the President's public assurances to progressives -- the "public option," understandably despised by the insurance industry, would be dropped from bill?

Nobody suggests that the President could easily or single-handedly change the behavior of Kent Conrad or Mike Ross. But there are certainly things -- effective things -- he could do to try, including making it more difficult for those politicians to stay in office, exactly as they threaten to do with defiant progressives. But they don't do that. They do the opposite. The reason that Blue Dogs and "centrists" exert such control in the Democratic Party and are able to ensure the Party remains beholden to corporate interests is because that's how Party leaders want it. That's how the Democratic Party has been built and it's how they continue to maintain their power.

Baucus speaks to Montana!

From the Montana blog Montana Maven's Opinions Worth Ropin' it looks like the nice folks of Montana have finally put some heat under Senator Baucus - good for them!

This is the press release from the Coalition of Montana Democratic Central Committees:

FOLLOWING RANCOR AMONG THE RANKS, BAUCUS ASSURES MONTANA CONSTITUENTS:
"I WANT A PUBLIC OPTION TOO"

U.S. Senator Max Baucus has finally broken his silence regarding his personal position on including a public option in health care reform legislation. Last Monday night (8/17), in an unprecedented conference call to Montana Democratic central committee chairs, the powerful leader of the Senate Finance Committee told his strongest supporters that he supported a public option. While discussing the obstacles to getting a public option through the Senate, he assured his forty listeners, "I want a public option too!" The conference call was groundbreaking in that none of the recipients could ever remember this kind of call ever happening before. The teleconference was set up seemingly in reaction to rising discontent among the local Democratic leaders with the Senator's failure to take a clear position on the issue. The discussion, which became contentious and rancorous at times, also touched upon the wisdom of creating insurance cooperatives as an alternative to a public option.

When several of the county chairs objected, commenting that they did not trust the health insurance companies to police themselves and limit their outrageous corporate profits, Baucus commented, "Neither do I."

In the aftermath of the teleconference, a coalition of eighteen Montana counties in the Senator's home state decided to move forward with their plan to issue a Unified Statement accompanied by a joint press release. The statement sends a loud and clear message to their Senator: Any health care reform package coming out of his Senate Finance Committee must contain, at a minimum, a provision for a strong public option. The action is a show of unity not previously seen in Montana political history. The statement asserts, "Here in Montana, the need for real health care reform could not be greater. Families, small business, and small ranches and farms are suffering and being crushed by the rising cost of health care. Thousands of Montanans are uninsured, and many more are losing their homes, businesses and ranches due to exorbitant medical bills."

Calling themselves the Coalition of the United Montana Democratic Central Committees, the group's statement announces it has "established a position in support of a strong public option as an essential element in health care reform." In specifying the necessary components needed for such a public option, they list:

• National Coverage
• Availability to all Americans
• Portability, which includes maintaining coverage even if one loses his or her job
• No exclusions for preexisting conditions, denial of coverage if one gets ill, or develops catastrophic costs
• Publicly run and administered with full transparency and accountability to congress
• No triggers

Christina Quijano, a Billings physician, is Chair of the Carbon County Democratic Central Committee. Carbon County is located in south-central Montana not far from Yellowstone National Park. Speaking for the Coalition, she pointed out, "For this number of counties from all across Montana to join together sends a strong signal to our representatives in Washington that their constituents here in Big Sky Country are unified and stand firm in their insistence that a public option be included in any health care reform bill." Senator Jon Tester (D-Mont) has said he would not vote against a public option, while Montana’s sole US representative, Denny Rehberg (R-Mont) remains opposed to such a measure. Max Baucus, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has emerged as a key player in the ongoing health care reform deliberations and, until now, has remained quiet about his personal view. In the final portion of the Coalition's Unified Statement, Quijano emphasizes Senator Baucus’ significant role in this piece of legislation: "We are counting on Senator Baucus to use his influence and leadership to create the most meaningful legacy of our times, real health care reform. 'Max, Montana's Senator', please don't let Montana down!"

Is Bingaman Obama's man in the Gang of Six?

One other statement came out of the last 3rd Thursday Meeting - this time if was from Bingaman's representative at the meeting. During his defense of Bingaman's involvement with the Gang he justified this treachery by informing us that Senator Bingaman was Obama's man in the Gang of Six. I assume he thought it might calm the crowd - trust me it didn't.

Wonder if Obama knows this?

Baucus must go -

Please go to Credo Action and sign the petition to tell Senate Dems to get rid of Max Baucus - the Insurance Industry's best friend in the Senate.

Another meaningless Heath Haussamen poll

Up today at his Republican leaning blog is another of Heath H's unscientific polls. This one's title is "In the health-care reform debate, which of these ideas do you support?".

Please have at it!

In the health-care reform debate, which of these ideas do you support?
	A public option
	Non-profit co-ops
	Neither
	I don’t know
Free polls from Pollhost.com

A "Tell" from Heinrich's chief of staff

From Wikipedia:

A tell in poker is a subtle but detectable change in a player's behavior or demeanor that gives clues to that player's assessment of his hand.

Outside of poker a "Tell" is an inadvertent release of information while discussing an issue.

In this case the Tell occurred during last night's Third Thursday meeting. The topic was of course health care. There were representatives from Heinrich, Bingaman and Udall. Steve Haro, Martin Heinrich's chief of staff, was probably the most talkative of the three and the source of the Tell.

During an exchange where he was asked if Martin would join the 60 other members of the House that had signed a pledge promising not to vote for a Health Care Reform bill without a strong public option he challenged the fact that such a list existed and then came the "Tell" when he said that if such a list existed Health Care reform was already dead.

Tells are always tied to a hidden piece of information - in this case the inference is clear - the public option won't be part of the bill and if there are indeed 60 members of the House that won't vote for it without a public option the bill is dead.

We can only hope that this is true - what Baucus & Associates (the Gang of 6 including our very own Jeff Bingaman) are crafting will no doubt be worse than the present situation. Better to do nothing than enact a bill written by and for the health care industry.

There was one amusing aside - Haro thanked us for his job. Sad to say it but the way things are going he needs to enjoy it now because he won't have it for long.

Ruh! Roh! There goes Whole Foods!

Wow, via JUSIPER and then OpenLeft looks like the CEO and founder of Whole Foods, a.k.a. Whole Paycheck, stuck his foot is some of Scooby Doo's doodoo when he published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal blasting the whole ideal of Health Care Reform. Seems all we have to do is free Mr Market from its shackles, let Insurance Companies do anything they want and everything will be hunky dory over night. Sini at JUSIPER feels a boycott of Whole Foods in in order. Fine with me, I can do without listening to announcements like "Phone call for Natural Living" over their PA system, but I will miss their bakery - its the only decent one in town.

Bingaman has turned his back on New Mexicans

For several weeks now I and others have become increasingly upset with Senator Jeff Bingaman and his work with the Gang of Six to torpedo health care reform. This felling only grew after his interview with the Albuquerque Journal last Saturday.

For whatever reason Jeff Bingaman has decided to "negoiate" with 2 fellow Democrats (M. Baucus & K. Conrad) and 3 Republicans (C. Grassley, O. Snowe & M. Enzi) to come up with a "bipartisan" bill to shove down out throats. The leaders of this special gang of 6 are Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley. They are both notable for how much money they have received in political contributions form the Health Care Industry and how strongly they oppose the "Public Option". Just to get the numbers straight:

- Senator Max Baucus Senate Finance Committee chairman and recipient of "$3 million from the health and insurance sectors from 2003 to 2008" (about 20% of the total donations from that sector)

- Senator Chuck Grassley - he's gotten about $2,000,000 from the same folks since 2003

Those are indeed large numbers. Certainly they are both bought and paid for representatives of the Health Care Industry. But, as they say, it only gets better! Now it turns out that not only is Jeff Bingaman sitting at a table with Health Care Industry flacks but also a "Deather" and that's no other than Senator Chuck Grassley, his partner in these "bipartisan" negotiations. From the Iowa Independent

“In the House bill, there is counseling for end of life,” Grassley said. “You have every right to fear. You shouldn’t have counseling at the end of life, you should have done that 20 years before. Should not have a government run plan to decide when to pull the plug on grandma.”

That should end the charade of Grassley's bipartisan concern for Health Care. Grassley got up and lied in front of a group of folks in Iowa and knew it when he did so. How can anyone take his "bipartisan" concerns seriously now?

Its time for New Mexico's senior Senator to stand up and condemn Grassley for his lies and Baucus for his corruption and end the charade that this little gang of 6 has any bipartisan concern for Health Care Reform at all. Jeff - as my dearly departed granny used to say "birds of a feather do flock together!"

Birther nonsense

This simply can't be seen enough! Bill Maher deals with the birther nonsense.

Enrique Ortez Colindez talks about Obama and the US

This is way too funny.

As the US State Department turns its back on Democracy and negotiates with the illegal government in Honduras the "new" Honduran Secretary of State gives us a taste of its mindset. One has to hand it to them though - even the most right winged racist Republican on the planet would never ever use the term "pickaninny" to refer to Obama but here we see a Honduran "Official" throwing it out without a moment's hesitation. One wonders if the US State Department will ever learn.

Tim Kaine's record on Gay rights -

I wondered if DBY in the post below had been fair to Tim Kaine, former Governor of Virginia and current head of the Democratic Party. On Google I used the search phrase/words:

         Tim Kain gay record

What you find below is from the results of the first half of the first page of that search. You decide -

From Rod 2.0:Beta when Kaine was being considered for VP:

The icing on the cake is Kaine's woeful record on gay rights—against gay adoption, partner benefits, discrimination legislation, and ,of course, against same-sex marriage and supported the amendment that now bans gay marriage in the Commonwealth. The Virginia governor also has the distinction of running one of the more creative gay-baiting campaigns in recent history, branding his anti-gay Republican opponent "having a gay sounding voice."

From a Washington Blade article titled "Va. House approves gay marriage ban amendment":

Kaine spokeswoman Delacey Skinner said that the governor-elect will sign the bill to call for a referendum. Kaine supports the amendment and opposes civil unions, she said. She added that he is interested in discussing measures “to make sure people can still be able to contract with each other.”

From a 2005 post to Sic Semper Tyrannis, a Virgina blog, we get an analysis of Kaine's statements showing how he moved over time to support Virgina's constitutional amendment banning both recognition of Gay Marriage and Civil Unions :

"I think the institution of marriage is fine. I don’t believe we need to create an alternative," Kaine tells Style. "Gays and lesbians should not be discriminated against in housing, or employment. When the question came up in the debate I said I support changing the state discrimination laws to [include gays]."

.....

"I have never said I supported gay civil unions, gay marriages," Kaine told the AP last Friday. "I do believe that people shouldn’t be kicked out of their jobs or discriminated against because of who they are."

.....

"Marriage between a man and a woman is the building block of the family and a keystone of our civil society. It has been so for centuries in societies around the world. I cannot agree with a court decision suddenly declaring that marriage must now be redefined to include unions between people of the same gender.

"Virginia defines marriage as being between a man and a woman and I strongly support that law. Regardless of the court ruling today in another state, I am confident that there is nothing in the Virginia or federal constitutions that would require Virginia to alter its longstanding policy about marriage."

.....

The Democrat [Tim Kaine] also insisted that he opposes gay marriage and gay civil unions but supports contractual rights for gay and lesbian Virginians.

Kilgore said he favors a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which Kaine opposes.

.....

Kilgore and Kaine said they support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages. Both said they disapprove of adoptions by gay couples.

But Kaine said that when he was a missionary in Honduras, he witnessed orphans who were treated "hellaciously." As a consequence, he would favor allowing individual gays or lesbians to adopt, so long as they create a loving environment, he said.

I could go on but its clear that Tim Kaine opposes gay civil unions, gay marriage, and adoption by gay couples. The good news is that he doesn't support beating up gays and lesbians because of their sexual orientation. I guess we should be glad for that.

Remember that Barack Obama appointed Tim Kaine as the head of the Democratic Party and considered him for the VP slot. As DBY says the signs were clearly there early on - either Barack Obama is a homophobe or simply doesn't care about LesBiGay rights. Sadly we put hope before reality now we must accept and deal with our mistake.

DBY gets it right - the Democratic Party isn't a friend to the Gay Community

Comments are great things to read. Sometimes they get to the bones of a problem faster than any series of articles could. The comment below is a perfect example of that. From a comment to an Editorial titled Don’t Let Our ‘Leaders’ Give Cover to Obama published in the NewYork Blade DBY describes the problem the LesBiGay Community is having with the Democratic Party perfectly. DBY says:

Welcome under the bus, my fellow gay Americans! Some of us have been here for a while. I started realizing something was amiss with Obama when he stood side-by-side with Donnie McClurkin, James Meeks, Mary Mary early in the primaries. And then refused to be interviewed by gay publications for most of the Democratic primaries. And then refused to have his picture taken with the (heterosexual!) Gavin Newsom. And then refused to attend the Chicago Pride Parade last summer. And then had Douglas Kmiec, major opponent of gay marriage, campaign for him in CA just as Prop 8 heated up. And then came Rick Warren. And the snubbing of Bishop Robinson. You see a pattern developing, don’t you? But even for someone who’s been paying attention to Obama’s homobigotry as much as me I was stunned by the DOMA-DOJ brief. The Administration sunk to a new low. And it’s time to stop making apologies for Obama’s actions. Let’s look reality in the eye and take our rights, even if they refuse to give them. The idea that we must “wait our turn” is absurd. We didn’t start asking for our rights last month!

The problem, sadly, is bigger than just Obama and his Administration. It is also the wider DNC. Tim Kaine, head of the DNC, is a rabid homophobe. And let us not forget that Donna Brazile famously declared that comparing gay rights to civil rights is an “affront to the civil rights movement.” Nancy Pelosi says she wants Congress to stay out of gay marriage. Harry Reid says he wants to see DADT addressed “Administratively.” Obama says his hands are tied and he can’t do anything! Excuse me, but so-called “Democrats” are controlling all three branches of government and nobody wants to touch gay rights with a 10 foot pole? Everyone likes to run around screaming that Bill Clinton gave us DOMA. Actually, the President doesn’t write legislation. Congress does. Congress wrote DOMA and passed it. Have you looked at the vote? House passed it 342-67. Senate passed it 85-14. Look at those numbers! I wish President Clinton vetoed the bill, but those numbers are not only veto proof, they wipe the floor with the Presidential veto. That’s a lot of Democrats voting for DOMA. Many of those same Democrats are still in Congress today. Let us not kid ourselves that Democrats are any better on this than Republicans. When Darth Cheney is to the left of Democrats on gay marriage….we have a serious problem on our hands! And the problem won’t go away until we ask for payment upfront from Democrats from now on. Not “We’ll help you now if you help us later.” No, DNC has to do something for us first. No more “I owe you’s!”

New Mexico needs a new Sheriff

An endorsement - Greg Solano for Lt. Governor
because
New Mexico needs a new Sheriff

Thursday night at Bernalillo County's monthly Third Thursday meeting many of us meet Greg Solano, Sheriff of Santa Fe County, for the first time and were won over. In fact I was so impressed I just made a small donation to his campaign via Act Blue. You can find his campaign's web site here and page for donations here.

From a practical political point of view he's new, has a fantastic life story, free of all the mess, corruption and political infighting in the Democratic Party and knows how to work a crowd. I walked out of the meeting a happy political camper knowing he has the stuff to go the distance and would be an asset to the Party who will work with Diane Denish to win next year. As far as I am concerned we have our candidate for Lt. Governor. Now its time to move on.

Obama's Plan for Gay Rights

before the sun sets on this administration

Well the Obama Admin trotted out John Berry, their highest ranking gay guy to talk to the Advocate - find the brief interview here.

Here's the money quote from Berry:

We have four broad legislative goals that we want to accomplish and legislation is one of these things where you’ve got to move when the opportunity strikes, so I’m going to list them in an order but it’s not necessarily going to go one, two, three, four. Obviously, I think the first opportunity is hate crimes and we’re hopeful that we can get that passed this week. We’re going to try, but if not, we’re going to keep at it until we get it passed. The second one ENDA, we want to secure that passage of ENDA, and third is we want to repeal legislatively “don’t ask don’t tell,” and fourth, we want to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

Now, I’m not going to pledge -- and nor is the president -- that this is going to be done by some certain date. The pledge and the promise is that, this will be done before the sun sets on this administration – our goal is to have this entire agenda accomplished and enacted into law so that it is secure.

So folks "before the sun sets on this administration" they will try to get something done.

Looks like we have just been thrown back under the bus by yet another Democratic Administration.

Blogs for DOMA updates

Since the Daily Kos and others only function in the current Obama DOMA mess is to say the LesBiGay Community needs to calm down and everything is just wonderful here's a few sites that are letting folks know what's happening and what it all means:

AMERICAblog
Pam's House blend ...always steamin'!
hunter for justice
WordInEdgewise
The Volokh Conspiracy

Others will be added as I find 'em!

Update - 061909, 10:04 PM
WhoRunsGov.com - The Plum Line
the widdershins
Washington Blade
New York Blade

Its becomming clear - Obama is no friend to the gay community.

As I have looked around today on liberal blogs its has become clear that if mentioned at all there is not much concern about Obama's DOJ defending DOMA. In MyDD Josh Orton first seems concerned then in less than an hour added an update where he pronounced it was no big deal. Most of the comments on his posting seemed to express the same view. Nowhere did anybody ask about Obama's track record on gay rights.

To me the real basis of the uproar is very simple - its not about DOMA per se its about Obama's record or rather lack of a record on gay rights since coming to the White House. To date he has done nothing to repeal DOMA or Don't Ask - Don't Tell, end the travel ban for HIV positive individuals or support gay marriage. In fact his view on gay marriage closely reslembles those of leading Republican homophobes.

The Liberal community will excuse us while we make a bit of noise while we throw a fit - we are just realizing Obama was a major mistake.

Obama's betrayal to the gay community continues -

Everybody is all over this - seems that Obama's Dept. of Justice has decided to trash the Gay community while it defends the homophobic DOMA bill signed by Bill Clinton. For the latest and greatest on this see Andrew at the Daily Dish, Pam at Pam's House Blend and a host of others.

For a good round up go to John Aravosis' post at AMERICAblog.

So much for Obama's promises to the LesBiGay Community. Seems the invite to Rev. Wright was more of a harbinger of things to come than even I thought.

Summit on LGBT Rights

Well the secret is out -



The only reason I know about it is because I walked out the door of a meeting at just the right time to overhear a conversation about the upcoming 'Summit".

We will see if we can slow the domestic partnership freight train. Why "they" want to agree to a second class status for Lesbian and Gays is really beyond me.

Update: Please note that the flyer only invites representatives of Organizations not members of the Community to the "Summit" (see the first sentence below the red line). Also, the next sentence is quite telling - its seems the discussion will be aimed at building support for the "next steps" not determining what the "next steps" will be. It seems that we, the little people, need a lecture about what the "next steps" should be.

Dead Meat?

While the main focus of the post was on the NM Democrats State Central Committee meeting Peter St. Cyr dropped a bit of a bomb at the end. It appears that Senator Linda Lopez, the person who voted with Republicans to elect Tim Jennings as President Pro Tem of the NM Senate, the main proponent in the Senate for the Suncal TID (SB 249), one of the Senators who voted to allow sleazy politicians to sue nonprofits (SB 652), the former Bernalillo Democratic Party County Chair who was thrown out because she was so obnoxious is running for the Democratic nomination for Lt. Governor.

This is gonna be interesting. While I'm sure the folks at SunCal are thrilled who else cares? The progressive wing of the Democratic Party dislikes her imensily and generally distrusts her. I really wonder what she is thinking.

Stick a fork in it - this candidacy was dead before it began.

I'm pissed!

In an article by David Alire Garcia titled "N.M. Catholic Church, gay activists seek compromise on domestic partnerships" some the internal controversy in the Lesbian and Gay Community that has surrounded these talks starts to erupt. Having been a part of that conversation and knowing that my views and those of other I respect were being ignored I decided to repurpose one of my emails as a comment and throw some fat publicly on the fire.

I fear that there is much more furor about these negotiations in the LesBiGay Community than Ms. Seigal suggests. As she readily admits she is a "professional" and her job is to get a deal done and move on. Those of us that remain in NM will be left to deal with the aftermath of her skills as a "professional lobbyist".

As I have said elsewhere, to Ms. Seigal and others, my problems with these negotiations starts with the fact that my rights are the subject of negotiations with religious leaders that I do not support nor believe have any right to cast me into the pit of second class citizenship. Everything that I have heard since the initial news of these discussions supports my fear that these unappointed and unelected representatives of the LesBiGay community have little interest in its feelings or opinions.

As I understand it these negotiations are aimed at dealing with the Church's objections to use of the word marriage in the Domestic Partnership (DP) bill. They disliked the fact that the DP bill used the word marriage and said that Domestic Partners had the same rights as a married couple. This appears to be based on the fact that the Church opposes the use of the word "marriage" in any way, shape of form that may connote some dignity to a lesbian or gay relationship. Hence all we need to do is yank the word "marriage" out of the DP bill and all would be well.

My underlying problem with this effort is that it simply reeks of the old ploy by the Southern segregationist - separate but equal. I, as a child of the 50's, who grew up in Alabama knows what this means, how it turned out back then and am not excited about revisiting it again. Its as if all the NAACP needed to do was sit down with Bull Conner and change a few words on their signs and in their songs and everything would be just lovely.

Certainly the folks at Legislative Services have their work cut out for them. To enumerate a list of all the rights and responsibilities of marriage while never mentioning the sacred word will be a massive task and its almost guaranteed that "things" will be left out. Whether these will be sins of omission or commission history will never now. I certainly look forward to reviewing this list and wonder how the Bishops will respond to it. Surely the production of the "list" will eviscerate the spirit of the original bill. Under this scheme our "partnerships" will never equal marriage, frankly they won't even equal a Domestic Partnership - they will just be a list of things to be negotiated like how many dozen eggs you get for a dollar or the cost current of an indulgence. Here Lucifer lies with the details. When it lists that a LesBiGay couple has the right to adoption what will the "Church" say? When the howl from the fundamentalist comes up will the Catholic Church be silent, join in or will they defend our rights to adopt children? Wanna make a bet what "they" do?

Moreover and from a tactical viewpoint probably much, much, much worse - this legislation will quickly be seen as a "list", as Seigal herself says, of our rights and responsibilities to be picked apart and ridiculed by our opponents. The production of such a "list" violates the basic principles of Politics 101 and is an out and out disaster. It makes me wonder about the political skill set of those that are suppose to be representing "us".

Once the "list" is produced then the real negotiations will begin in Santa Fe and I don't expect us to fare well by them. We will be whipsawed from stem to stern and rights will disappear or be limited all along the Legislation's tortuous path from when our "representatives" prostrate themselves before the Catholic Church to seek their indulgence to the numerous and sundry Legislative Committees that the bill will have to move through. Since we will have agreed to tying our basic human rights to a "list" subject to negotiations every Committee that has some jurisdiction over some component of that "list" will have to have its say. Surely adoption will be the topic of some heated hearings. No doubt it will be the first to go or to be "studied later" then other things will follow. All the while what our opponents cannot remove they will poison so that ultimately the "list" dies as a cruel joke or, even worse, we will have our "marriage-less", meaningless "list" passed and be signed into law - a disaster for all to see.

I have no doubt that those running the other side's negotiations understand perfectly what the production of this "list" means and worry that we are fundamentally out gunned at the negotiating table. This added to the fact that the Governor and our negotiator wants a bill passed, any bill will probably do, makes me fear the outcome of these negotiations.

In closing I must ask - why the rush to cement our status as second class citizens in New Mexico? Its quite possible that this bill will be worse than no bill at all. Time is on our side - sometimes the best thing to do is wait.

Vote now! Mary should go!

Heath Haussamen has a poll up at his blog "Heath Hausamen on New Mexico Politics" asking - "Should Santa Fe County Clerk Valerie Espinosa challenge Secretary of State Mary Herrera in next year's Democratic primary?"

Duhhhhhhhhhh! Please go there and vote Yes now. How can she be any worse than Mary "the hair" Herrera?

One question we should all be asking is why hasn't Mary certified more than one voting machine company? Expiring minds want to know.

The war within

Nearing the end of the 2009 Legislative session its time to pull out the crystal ball and make some predictions re: the State of the Democratic Party. The main prediction is obvious to anybody that has been to any Progressive gathering - it is divided and things are moving from bad to worse. Its really easy to sense the absolute rage that Progressives are feeling toward the establishment Democrats in the Senate. The main topic of discussion is how to transform these feelings into actions. The fact that its getting easier to hear and see what happening during Legislative sessions only makes matters worse. From votes on Domestic Partnership to TIDDS, Ethics and Health Care Reform the incredible corruption, homophobia and outright stupidity of members of Democratic Party is horrifying.

What Progressives will do isn't clear today. As a start expect more work to Primary sitting members of the House and Senate and some direct actions against them to shine light on their actions.

Hispanos Unidos - run for cover the Mexicans are comming!

Just saw this ad and its really, really bad - it totally misrepresents what that law would do -

The ad suggests that bus loads of folks, no doubt evil Mexicans, will be showing up at the polls to vote for the nasty Anti-American Democrats.

The truth is that while you can show up and vote you will cast a provisional ballot that won't be counted until you are legally registered as a voter. Now the ad doesn't say this but truth is not the issue here. This ad is meant to scare folks not inform them.

Since there are existing laws that deal with voting illegally anybody that cast a fraudulent ballot would be facing prosecution and jail time for their efforts.

Of course the ad doesn't tell you this but again truth isn't the issue here.

The ad is just an extension of the usual Republican refrain that there is massive voter fraud in New Mexico and all the Democrats want to do is make things worse. It would help the Republican's cause if they could point out a bunch of cases where illegal voting actually had occurred over the last few years but since they can't they just keep the drum beat going.

So what is Hispanos Unidos up to? And frankly who are they? From their web site the Organization's Mission Statement says it exist to:

"To educate citizens about the perils of big government and to support candidates whose platforms include minimization of government interference in the daily lives of Americans."

Below that it goes on to say:

Welcome to Hispanos Unidos, a non-partisian Political Action Committee dedicated to the belief that better government means less government.

I really love the "Non-Partisian" part! Wanna make a bet!

Martin Heinrich does as AIPAC tells him -

Sadly, one of Martin Heinrich's first acts in Congress was to support Israel's war on the Palestinian People by voting for Rep. Howard Berman's (D-Calif.) resolution expressing unequivocal support for the Israeli attack on Gaza. The resolution makes it very, very, very clear that without question and without doubt all the blame for the war and all responsibility to end it rests with Hamas. Ultimately, it encourages Israel to keep up the good work! To Martin it seems that Israel is incapable of doing wrong.

While the real reason for the Israeli attack on Gaza was to continue the Iron Wall Policy in effect since the 40's (essentially a long-term policy to subjugate the Palestinian People to Israeli will, for more on this see Another War, Another Defeat by John J. Mearsheimer) the supposed cause of this round of genocide was the 6,000 or so rockets that Hamas has fired at Israel over the last several years. These rockets resulted in the deaths of approximately 10 Israelis. Since the Gaza carnage began Israel's military has to date killed more than 1,300 Palestinians. No doubt Martin would approve the kill ratio for this excursion - a bit over 100 to 1. One wonders how Martin feels about Israel's habit of killing defenseless Palestinians - the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) seem to especially enjoy culling young Palestinian schoolchildren as an especially effective means of ethnic cleansing.

Ultimately, Martin looks to be yet another mindless tool of AIPAC. Certainly he is not alone - see Glen Greenwald's article Unanimous Consent in the Jan. 26th, 2009 issue of The American Conservative. It appears that AIPAC owns both parties and both houses of Congress which now supports the consensus view that the Palestinians are just another sub-human race best left to the tender mercies of Israel's Government. Sadly, on this point, I doubt Martin will stray too far from the fold in the future.

Certainly, one thing is for sure - it didn't take Martin long to get blood on his hands.

Something real to do about Rick Warren

Finally something to do besides bitch about Obama's choice of the homophobe Rick Warren to give the invocation at his Inauguration.

Please go to Turn Back Hate and sign the petition.

This is certainly an excellent starting point for the Progressive Community. Hopefully more ideas and actions are on the way.

Obama's obscene pick, the homophobe Pastor Rick Warren to do the invocation for the Inauguration

Back again!

So Obama has gone and gotten himself the out and out homophobe, Pastor Rick Warren, to do the invocation for the Inauguration. If you don't know much about the good Pastor well YouTube and CNN will inform!

Lets see - a gay relationship is like beastiality, pedophilia, pologamy and then he laughs when someone suggest he might be a homophobe.

What should we do - how about holding alternatives to the official homophobic Inaguration all over the country morning what could have been and asking for better? Above all we shouldn't be quiet about the fact that we are pissed and have been fundamentally insulted.

Albuquerque Republican Journal endorses Darren!

Well this is a shocker! ((Not!))

This morning, Albuquerque's Republican paper, the Journal endorsed White for CD1, Tinsley for CD2 and Lujan for CD3. They have followed their old, established pattern - they endorse Republicans except when the Democrat is gonna win by a huge margin. The same will hold true for the Senate and Presidential races - expect an endorsement for Udall and McCain. Udall because he is fixing to trash Pearce and McCain because that is just who they are.

The fact that the Albuquerque Journal is a Republican paper isn't a surprise to anybody interested in NM politics. They work hard to get Republicans elected and to keep them in office - proof of this comes easily from a quick review the coverage they gave/give Heather Wilson and Saint Pete. Their reporter in DC routinely gushed all over himself in praise for the pair. Beyond this coverage headlines and articles were routinely constructed as setup pieces to unfairly tarnish their opponents. Heather has made heavy use of them in the past. Who can forget all those advertisements over the years that have featured Journal articles to slam her opponent.

For the life of me I simply can't understand why any Dem subscribes to the Journal. Its a filthy rag and we can only hope that one happy day it will disappears and die. Who needs another spokesperson for the Republican Party? They already have Fox News.

Where are the Albuquerque Journal endorsements?

The title says it all - where are the endorsements?

We are a bit over 8 days or 201 hours till the polls open Nov. 4th and the Journal still hasn't endorsed anybody? My bets were on:

McCain
Udall
White

They would endorse Udall because they knew he would win and Pearce is dead meat. The other two are just the default choices for the Journal. They always endorse Republicans except when they are really, really hopeless - for example Pearce.

Maybe they don't like their choices - guess its not a good year for a Republican paper.

La Raison d'entre for the bailout bill

So, the Bushies lied once again - that's to be expected. Nobody but the perma stupid crowd should be surprised.

From yesterday's NYT, found via TPM, an article by Joe Nocera gives the real reason for Paulson's bailout bill - it's to finance the consolidation of the US financial industry into a few large chosen banks. As Nocera notes:

In point of fact, the dirty little secret of the banking industry is that it has no intention of using the money to make new loans.

Here "the money" refers to the money contained in the bailout bill.

All was revealed during an Oct. 17 conference call for JPMorgan Chase employees when the following question was asked:

“Chase recently received $25 billion in federal funding. What effect will that have on the business side and will it change our strategic lending policy?”

Amazingly, one of the executives actually answered the question honestly:

“Twenty-five billion dollars is obviously going to help the folks who are struggling more than Chase,” he began. “What we do think it will help us do is perhaps be a little bit more active on the acquisition side or opportunistic side for some banks who are still struggling. And I would not assume that we are done on the acquisition side just because of the Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns mergers. I think there are going to be some great opportunities for us to grow in this environment, and I think we have an opportunity to use that $25 billion in that way and obviously depending on whether recession turns into depression or what happens in the future, you know, we have that as a backstop.”

Nocera goes on to explain:

Read that answer as many times as you want — you are not going to find a single word in there about making loans to help the American economy. On the contrary: at another point in the conference call, the same executive (who I’m not naming because he didn’t know I would be listening in) explained that “loan dollars are down significantly.” He added, “We would think that loan volume will continue to go down as we continue to tighten credit to fully reflect the high cost of pricing on the loan side.” In other words JPMorgan has no intention of turning on the lending spigot.

It is starting to appear as if one of Treasury’s key rationales for the recapitalization program — namely, that it will cause banks to start lending again — is a fig leaf, Treasury’s version of the weapons of mass destruction.

In fact, Treasury wants banks to acquire each other and is using its power to inject capital to force a new and wrenching round of bank consolidation. As Mark Landler reported in The New York Times earlier this week, “the government wants not only to stabilize the industry, but also to reshape it.” Now they tell us.

Indeed, Mr. Landler’s story noted that Treasury would even funnel some of the bailout money to help banks buy other banks. And, in an almost unnoticed move, it recently put in place a new tax break, worth billions to the banking industry, that has only one purpose: to encourage bank mergers. As a tax expert, Robert Willens, put it: “It couldn’t be clearer if they had taken out an ad.”

Friday delivered the first piece of evidence that this is, indeed, the plan. PNC announced that it was purchasing National City, an acquisition that will be greatly aided by the new tax break, which will allow it to immediately deduct any losses on National City’s books.

As part of the deal, it is also tapping the bailout fund for $7.7 billion, giving the government preferred stock in return. At least some of that $7.7 billion would have gone to NatCity if the government had deemed it worth saving. In other words, the government is giving PNC money that might otherwise have gone to NatCity as a reward for taking over NatCity.

Next Nocera says:

I don’t know about you, but I’m starting to feel as if we’ve been sold a bill of goods.

Well that's two of us.

Nocera then concludes with a conversation he had with Senator Chris Dodd:

Late Thursday afternoon, I caught up with Senator Dodd, and asked him what he was going to do if the loan situation didn’t improve. “All I can tell you is that we are going to have the bankers up here, probably in another couple of weeks and we are going to have a very blunt conversation,” he replied.

He continued: “If it turns out that they are hoarding, you’ll have a revolution on your hands. People will be so livid and furious that their tax money is going to line their pockets instead of doing the right thing. There will be hell to pay.”

Let’s hope so.

Its nice to think that "There will be hell to pay" but, based on previous experiences, I seriously doubt it. The Washington establishment, both Dem and Republican, are way too owned to ever do much about another big bank atrocity.

Sweet Home Alabama - welcome to the surreal state

Perhaps the ultimate version of this song. Its really, really real - love the "dos", the shoes, and the chicks on stage. Checkout the expressions of the choir members, they either seem to be simply amazed or amazed and yucking it up at the same time. Also, don't miss how the lead singer and choir pronounce "AlaBama" - very cool.

The Leningrad Cowboys backed by the Red Army Choir.

While I'm not sure what Lenin or George Wallace would think I'm absolutely sure Lynyrd Skynyrd would approve.

Found via naked capitalism.

"their God is bigger than you"

Here you equals the Christian God
From a McCain rally in Iowa, found at TPM. This has to be watched to know how sick these people really are.

Here's my transcript of this clip:

"I'd also add Lord, that your reputation is involved in all that happens between now and November because there are millions of people around this World praying to their God, whether its Hindu, Buddha, Allah that his opponent wins for a variety of reasons and Lord I pray that you would guard your own reputation because they are gonna think that their God is bigger than you if that happens. So I pray that you would step forward and honor your own name in all that happens between now and the election day."

This is so wrong and so sick I can't even begin to dissect it. From my brief readings of the King James version of the Bible I am reminded of the following:

• Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
• Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

These people are using God for their purposes not following the Bible to achieve its purposes. One wonders who exactly they are worshiping these days!?!

A P.S. on this - I never realized that God had an ego - its news to me that that God cares one way or the other what anybody thinks. That's a concept that should put the Theologist into a tailspin for years to come!

Truth!!!!

Truth and from a Republican no less .......

From Senator Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican:

"It forces innocent taxpayers to bail out government policies and Wall Street mistakes. It asks the American people to take a leap of faith and trust people who have consistently misled them, ..."

raping america

Guess its just one indignity piled upon many others but what the US Senate did tonight makes me sick.

The Bushies have succeeded in taring the Democrats with the same shit that has covered the White House for so long. To make matters worse the Democrats were willing participants. The Dems have no excuses now - they along with their Republican friends are blameable for all that will come. May Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the other Democratic Bush sycophants that so willingly came to Wall Street's aid burn in hell for what they have done to the United States and the Democratic Party.

Anybody that actually believes the citizens of the United States will ever see more than a few pennies out of that 700 billion that the American people will soon owe is simply out of their minds. Wall Street has already figured out 7,777 different ways to steal it all.

Below is a list of the filthy bastards that have helped Wall Street rape the USA yet again. I'm sad to see Obama on that list - guess he's just another shill for the corporate world after all.

Akaka
Alexander
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Burr
Byrd
Cardin
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Dodd
Domenici
Durbin
Ensign
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inoye
Isakson
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson, NE
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse

Wall Street to handle our Social Security?

When will the Dems start screaming about McCain and the Republicans who want to privatize Social Security? They want the same crooks, creeps, and thieves that brought us the mess on Wall Street to save Social Security. All the Streeters will do is steal every cent the average person has -

So why haven't we gotten that attack? Its simple and sad - the Dems are just as owned by Wall Street as the Republicans so they won't attack the criminals on Wall Street. That's the Real Reason we won't get an attack on the Republicans about Social Security Privatization.

love the ad - hate the ethanol policy

While I certainly wish Scott Kleeb well in his run for Senate, think his recent ad is great however his love for corn based ethanol leaves lots to be desired.

she should know ..........

Carly Fiorina, a women who knows and personally demonstrated how not to run a large Corporation, does the old foot and mouth routine about Sarah Palin and then goes on to extend the idiocy to McCain in the clip below.

I'm so glad McCain has friends like her - he certainly deserves them.

Clinton sycophants at it again-

I'm furious.

I always wondered how long it would take the Clinton sycophants to crawl out of this toilets and try to sabotage Obama's candidacy once the going got rough. Well obviously not long.

Over at Huff Po we are treated to the post "Why Replacing Biden With Hillary Makes Perfect Sense for Obama" by Andy Ostroy saying Obama should trash Joe Biden to replace him with the sainted one - Hillary Clinton - and all will be well. With friends like this Obama needs no enemies.

Over at Another White Female for Barack a newly minted web site that seems intent on doing what it can to support this "swap" and elect John McCain we find more of this nonsense. The blog's second post "Maybe this Hillary/Biden Swap Idea Isn't Crazy" focuses on this idea. My comment on that post is below:

This is amazing.

Obviously you want to destroy Obama's candidacy - I don't know if you are some crazed reverse sexist Clinton sycophant or a Republican operative.

Doesn't really matter - the damage you are doing is the same.

If you are another Clinton creep please understand that she lost - she couldn't even run a successful campaign against a young black guy. She had the money, she had the connections and she still lost. Now you want to do everything you can to make sure Obama looses so the perfect one, Saint Hillary, can try again.

Please leave!

Told you I am pissed.

By-the-by, need to add this to my list of reasons why its perfectly OK to hate the Clinton's. I expect Obama will win in November but if he does loose we all need to remember the treachery of the Clinton's and their supporters. They are not our friends - they care nothing about the issues and God knows the Clinton's have never cared about the Democratic Party. Its just a tool to use for their personal glory.

Power versus Governance

For quite a while now it seems to me that the campaign goals of the Dems and Repubs have differed. The Republicans run for power the Democrats run to govern. That difference explains much of what has happened and what will happen in the 50 or so days.

Why the Republican excitement -

Being essentially a snoop I couldn't help but overhear the following conversation between two heavily religious Republicans, lets call 'em he and she.

he to she - "Well, what do you think?"
she - "I haven't been this excited in a while, I think we really have a chance"
he - "I know I heard her speech."

After hearing this and reading that McCain is a flop on the stump without "her" its clear that the Republican religious base has adopted Palin as their own. I seriously doubt any of the negative news about her will diminish that. Remember their support is "faith based" so the more negative the reality the stronger their faith in her will be.

Let's all hope that the same won't be true for Independents and those white female Democrats that are toying with voting for the McCain ticket.

The parodies begin

They were inevitable -

More and better parodies are coming because Sara Palin is such a great target -

Sarah Palin and the Third Wave

As reporters continue to explore Sarah Palin's life and views its clear that her fundamentalist religion is at the base of what she says, thinks and does.

Below are excerpts from an article at Huff Po about the focus of Wasilla Assembly of God, the main Church were Sarah Palin chooses to worship. While its well know that followers of the "End Times" theology have long been "insiders" in the Republican Party if Palin and McCain are elected they will will move into the Vice President's Office and possibly the President's Office. They also show how heavily involved Palin is in the activities of her Churches and how they have supported her bids for public office.

"Sarah Palin's churches are actively involved in a resurgent movement that was declared heretical by the Assemblies of God in 1949. This is the same 'Spiritual Warfare' movement that was featured in the award winning movie, "Jesus Camp," which showed young children being trained to do battle for the Lord. At least three of four of Palin's churches are involved with major organizations and leaders of this movement, which is referred to as The Third Wave of the Holy Spirit or the New Apostolic Reformation. The movement is training a young "Joel's Army" to take dominion over the United States and the world."
...........
"Sarah Palin's extensive pattern of association with the Wasilla Assembly of God has continued nearly up to the day she was picked by Senator John McCain as a vice-presidential running mate. Palin's dedication to the Wasilla church is indicated by a Saturday, September 7, 2008, McClatchy news service story detailing possibly improper use of state travel funds by Palin for a trip she made to Wasilla, Alaska to attend, on June 8, 2008, both a Wasilla Assembly of God "Masters Commission" graduation ceremony and also a multi-church Wasilla area event known as "One Lord Sunday.""
...........
"The Wasilla Assembly of God church is deeply involved with both Third Wave activities and theology."
...........
"The Third Wave is a revival of the theology of the Latter Rain tent revivals of the 1950s and 1960s led by William Branham and others. It is based on the idea that in the end times there will be an outpouring of supernatural powers on a group of Christians that will take authority over the existing church and the world. The believing Christians of the world will be reorganized under the Fivefold Ministry and the church restructured under the authority of Prophets and Apostles and others anointed by God. The young generation will form "Joel's Army" to rise up and battle evil and retake the earth for God.

While segments of this belief system have been a part of Pentecostalism and charismatic beliefs for decades, the excesses of this movement were declared a heresy in 1949 by the General Council of the Assemblies of God, and again condemned through Resolution 16 in 2000. The beliefs and manifestations of the movement include the use of 'strategic level spiritual warfare' to expel territorial demons from American and world cities. Worship includes excessive charismatic manifestations such as hundreds of people falling, 'slain in the spirit,' and congregations laughing, jerking, and shrieking uncontrollably."
...........
"Mike Rose, senior pastor of Juneau Christian Center has a long relationship with Rodney Howard -Browne, credited with being the instigator of the outbreak of 'Holy Laughter' around the world, including the Toronto Airport Revival. Thomas Muthee visited Wasilla Assembly of God and gave 10 consecutive sermons at the church, from October 11-16 2005. As both Palin and Wasilla AoG Head Pastor Ed Kalnins have attested, Thomas Muthee 'prayed over' Sarah Palin and entreated God to "make a way" prior to Palin's successful bid for the Alaska governorship."
...........
"The Third Wave, also known as the New Apostolic Reformation, is a network of Apostles, many of them grouped around C. Peter Wagner, founder of the World Prayer Center. This center, which was built in coordination with Ted Haggard and his New Life Church in Colorado Springs, was featured in an article by Jeff Sharlet in Harpers, May 2005, "Soldiers of Christ." Sharlet was one of the first to write in the secular press about the World Prayer Center which is often referred to by those familiar with the Third Wave as the 'Pentagon for Spiritual Warfare.' It features computer systems that store the data of communities around the world, mapping out unsaved peoples' groups and spiritual mapping information for spiritual warfare."
...........
"Wagner's top leaders often conduct spiritual warfare campaigns against the demons that block the acceptance of their brand of Christian belief, such as 'Operation Ice Castle' in the Himalayas in 1997. Several of their top prophets and generals of intercession spent weeks in intensive prayer to "confront the Queen of Heaven." This queen is considered by them to be one of the most powerful demons over the earth and is the Great Harlot of Mystery Babylon in Revelation. (The "Great Harlot [or 'whore'] of Mystery Babylon" theme also figures prominently in the sermons of Texas megachurch pastor and Christians United For Israel founder John Hagee, former endorser of John McCain's 2008 presidential bid.) Wagner and his group also claim that the Queen of Heaven is Diana, the pagan god of the biblical book Ephesians and the god of Mary veneration in the Roman Catholic Church."