Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
How Health Care Reform Could Fall Apart
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid eked out 60 votes on a procedural motion to start the health care debate Saturday night - so there's no guarantee he can pass a bill on the merits.
With so many players divided on key issues, there's no guarantee that Reid can pass a bill at all. Photo: AP And if he struggles, the reasons will be clear: deep divides among Democrats on a public insurance plan, abortion, tax hikes and cost-cutting. Liberals want the plan to be generous enough. Moderates fear a budget-buster. And everyone is trying to avoid angering seniors.
Even in the blush of Saturday's victory, Reid (D-Nev.) is far from having the votes to move his $848 billion package to final passage. At least four centrists have pledged to oppose it in its current form, largely over the public option. Reid is in a bind. Stay to the left, and moderates vote no. Move a tad to the right, and Reid faces insurrection from the left, as liberals in his own caucus and in the House vow not to compromise any further on their signature issue.
As one of the Senate most liberal members, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), told POLITICO's The Arena: "I have made it clear to the administration and Democratic leadership that my vote for the final bill is by no means guaranteed."
Health care reform proponents considered Saturday's vote a major milestone, one that significantly boosted the odds of passing a bill. But, as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) vowed Saturday, "the battle has just begun" - and here are the battle lines where President Barack Obama's vision of reform could falter.
No good option for public option
A Democratic dream - expanding the government's role in guaranteeing health care to the uninsured - might well be reform's undoing.
Public option proponents, including Sanders and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), say they have already given up enough. They agreed to forgo a single-payer system. They decided not to push a government plan tied to Medicare rates. And they accepted Reid's proposal to include the opt-out provision. That's it, they say.
The more conservative members of the caucus won't budge either. They agreed Saturday to allow the debate to begin, but effectively killed the opt-out idea - Reid's attempt at compromise.
Right now, there is no public option plan that could garner 60 votes. A public plan "trigger" if private insurers fall short could come close - saying, losing Sanders but picking up Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) - but there's no guarantee it would fly in the House.
Enter "The Hammer," an idea from Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) States that lack affordable choices would be required to offer a national insurance program that wouldn't be government-financed or government-run.
Carper had already attempted a compromise with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) - and came up empty-handed. Brown and others sound prepared to walk away if Democrats can't work this out.
"Four members of the Senate aren't going to tell the other 55 what to do on these issues," Brown said of the public option.
No room for abortion compromise
It's one of the most emotionally charged issues in the debate, with anti-abortion activists insisting that health reform cannot expand federal funding for abortions.
But when it comes down to whether Democrats can accomplish health reform this year, it becomes a vote-counting problem - how many anti-abortion Democrats would walk away from a bill they don't like?
Reid can't afford a single defection - and already, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who opposes abortion rights, says weak language could be enough to oppose final passage.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could lose at least 10 Democrats if the Senate tried to water down the tough anti-abortion language in her bill.
At the same time, about 40 Democrats in the House say they can't vote for a bill that goes as far as the House bill does now, with the so-called Stupak amendment that prevents a public insurance plan from offering elective abortions.
The big player here isn't Reid or Pelosi but the Catholic Church, which helped get the Stupak amendment into the House bill. Any abortion language may have to win the backing of the church for members to sign on - and the church is sticking by a tough anti-abortion stance that angers many liberals.
Is there a middle ground? That's not at all clear.
Millionaires vs. Cadillacs
Republicans pounded one big talking point all day Saturday: health reform raises taxes. And it's true, the plans would.
What's worse for Democrats is that the House and Senate have starkly different visions of how to pay for reform. And the House hates the Senate tax, and the Senate hates the House tax.
Not surprisingly, politics are at play. The House went with a populist soak-the-rich tax on "millionaires" to pay for almost half the near-trillion dollar price-tag in its bill. And bowing to pressure from powerful union backers, Democrats steered clear of any tax on the so-called "Cadillac" plans - high-cost policies that many unions have negotiated for their workers over the years.
Reid relies heavily on taxing the Cadillac plans - but won't touch a millionaires tax, which was never debated in the Senate.
Is there any give? Reid signaled he might be inclined to get a little closer to the House by saying he'd bump up the Medicare tax on high-earners. The "botax" on cosmetic surgery also seems aimed at the wealthy but only raises $5 billion. This will be one of the hottest debates when the House and Senate try to merge their bills.
Scaring seniors: Medicare cuts, higher premiums?
Republicans also tried to stir this sleeping giant Saturday, pounding Democrats for big cuts in Medicare under the Senate plan - at least $300 billion worth.
"So here we are telling the American people that we're going to fix health care in America and the way we're going to pay for the massive government takeover of health care is through cuts in Medicare?" said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)
The reductions will almost certainly cut some seniors' benefits, a fact that has become a central opposition argument echoed from Capitol Hill to K Street. The cuts are likely to bump more than half the seniors currently enrolled in the popular Medicare Advantage program.
Democrats are keenly aware of the danger in a senior revolt and note that AARP, the nation's largest seniors' lobby, would not have endorsed reforms if they hurt seniors.
But there's another danger to Democrats lurking in the bill - dissent toward the White House deal with the drug-makers. Many Democrats feel PhRMA got off easy by only having to kick in $80 billion in cuts toward health reform. Some liberal Democrats want to change the deal's terms and force the industry to sell drugs to the federal government at a discount.
PhRMA insists that would bump up the seniors' Medicare prescription drug premiums by 20 percent. If the Senate includes the rebates, industry officials privately say that they'll consider running ads slamming senators for voting to increase seniors' drug costs.
"PhRMA would have to let people know the truth," said a senior pharmaceutical lobbyist. "I don't know why they would want to increase premiums."
Health fix fuels deficit worries
When Obama campaigned on enacting reform, he pledged to cut premiums, reduce the spiraling growth in medical costs and not add a dollar to the federal deficit.
It's not completely clear that he'll be able to accomplish any of those goals, and the public is catching on.
That's bad news indeed for Obama's efforts, especially at a time when voters already are giving him low marks for the sputtering economy and the 10 percent unemployment rate.
A Quinnipiac poll found that only 19 percent of voters believed Obama's pledge that health reform wouldn't boost the deficit in the next 10 years.
Doug Elmendorf, the Congressional Budget Office director, found that neither the House bill nor the Senate bill would add to the federal deficit. But federal spending for health care would go up under both bills in the next decade -- as much as $598 billion under the House bill over 10 years, roughly $85 billion in the Senate Finance Committee bill, the CBO said.
No one has been able to guarantee premiums won't rise. And there are serious questions about whether the bills go far enough to rein in costs.
That may explain why Democrats are now talking more about how the bills will expand coverage than about whether they will lower premiums for most families. And that's a big problem for the president and his congressional allies, given how uneasy independent voters and moderate Democrats feel about health care at this point.
In the absence of CBO data on premiums, expect Republicans to keep exploiting this weakness.
Chris Frates contributed to this story.
61 Comments so far
Show AllThere is no "Health Care Reform" to fall apart because REAL health care reform isn't on the table. We cannot call it real reform until the for profit insurance companies are no longer part of the equation. What's being discussed is the American people being forced to buy policies at unregulated prices from the same companies that wrecked health care in this country in the first place. How is THAT reform??? This only increases the stranglehold of the monopoly on the American people and makes sure they get a piece of the pie while adding absolutely NO VALUE??? They pay the bills with our money, that's all, and extract a profit for doing so. This will give us a system where the for profit companies dictate what coverage we get, force us to buy it at the prices they determine. How is this reform??? It isn't, it's just another sellout to the special interests by our so called representatives.. Why can't people see that the government paying the bills, with our money (taxes) will get the job done cheaper and more efficiently like in practically every other developed country? This isn't rocket science, it works everywhere else and has been for anywhere from 20 to 60 years. Universal single payer is the ONLY real reform, which is why it's not on the table...
Bingo.
Exactly. My first thought on reading the headline was "*could* fall apart?? *could*??? It already *did*, the moment single-payer was excluded"
Exactly, Fred.
"Why can't people see that the government paying the bills, with our money (taxes) will get the job done cheaper and more efficiently like in practically every other developed country?"
That's the same question even some social conservatives I ran into asked. Real conservatives and real progressives have more in common with HR 676 than most people realize. The irony is the HR 3962 is actually uniting true conservatives and true progressives against it.
One lesson to learn from this year's health care fiasco is this. If it's not reform, chances are it's either an illusion of reform at best or deform at its worst and that's all that's on the table.
The only way universal single payer will ever see the light of day is when this country is completely in the Netherworld.
After we have single payer Medicare for All then I shall consider voting for Democrats again.
I'll never vote Republican after Bush.
I'm with you, Humbaba, I've had it up to here with both parties.
The idea that it's public knowledge that the Catholic Church is influencing this legislation is an outrage. The Pope can go straight to hell for his meddling. Taxing the churches could help fund this legislation; between the Mormon and Catholic churches they have more money than god.
America is a is center-right nation, but the Senate certainly is right of center. Reason - two senators per state, regardless of population. So real healthcare reform gets held hostage by conservodems from places like Nebraska, Arkansas, and Louisiana. They are offered concession after concession and still won't vote for a bill. Enough already.
America is center left. The idea that Americans are center-right is right-wing propaganda.
http://www.alternet.org/election08/106276/
http://mediamatters.org/reports/200905270017
Has anyone else noticed how completely censored our views have been during this entire debate? First single payer was conspicuous to us in its absence. Now television talks about Republican opposition, but never mentions that the Left doesn't like this bill either but for different reasons. We have become non-persons in our own country. Our views don't exist.
The televised themes are always that the Left wants a socialist-style tax and spend expansion of coverage for poor people, and the Right doesn't want to pay taxes. The truth is more complicated, with the majority supporting elements of both liberal and conservative views. But the corporate-controlled national dialog talks only in caricatures, thereby avoiding the evermore-obvious lack of ability to govern on behalf of the people instead of catering to raising money for reelection.
The problem the MSM faces (please don't take this as an endorsement or pitch for the mainstream media 'cause it isn't) is that it has to deliver "the news" in a method that a 6th grader can understand. Unfortunately, I am not sure today's average American can even comprehend that!
What's hard to understand about "Free Health Care!"? That's all the MSM has to tout it as. No, the MSM understands their role in aiding and abetting the right wing agenda perfectly. Don't blame dumb ass Amerikans.
aussidawg sez: "... (The MSM) has to deliver "the news" in a method that a 6th grader can understand."
***
No, that was the 1980s.
Today, the Assimilated Press has to deliver "the news" in a method that makes a profit. Which means corporate advertisers and politicians buying advertising time. Which means courting these groups and not making them uncomfortable.
Facts and truth are not conducive to this relationship.
I'm with you!!! Until we get Universal single-payer health care for all, we will be nothing but VICTIMS of the scumbag pharmaceutical companies and the healthcare insurance thieves!!!!
Our Congress is totally WORTHLESS - because never has their consideration been "what's best for the American people!!!!!"
For the life of me, I cannot determine a single benefit of a "health insurance" company. All they are is a "middle-man" between the people and the doctors/hospitals. They simply collect money from us, keep most of it for themselves, and then pay our doctor and hospital bills. And sometimes they even tell doctors and hospitals not to provide care for us. We have NO REAL NEED for the insurance company.
A non-profit government run Universal single-payer healthcare system just like Medicare is what all citizens should have the benefit of. Cut out the "middle men" (the scavengers) and let's get on with it!!!! The scavengers can always find jobs elsewhere - anyone can clean a toilet!!!
an anti-abortion mandatory insurance co. profit bill setback
Dang
Dang
Dang
i almost forgot about universal health care again, again
We've had a health INSURANCE debate for six-months.
The outcome is this horrendous legislation.
When will we have a health CARE debate?
You're right. This hasen't been a discussion on healthcare, it's been a business meeting between the government and health insurance industry on how to most effieicently increase the profits of the industry.
Yes, logically, this can not pass, but as we all know, time and time again in the last 30 years, the two right wing parties have seemingly conspired together in a bizarre "dance of death" (death not for them but for their system and for the common people in it) to make sure that really bad legislation gets passed. Call it the nightmare that won't end, or the endless horror movie. Even when a bad law looks doomed to fail, it passes anyway.
Then meanwhile of course, the country goes farther and farther down the drain. Because bad laws make a country go down the drain (duh: Homer Simpson)
Therefore, I have already been spending some time on disaster control assuming that this madness eventually passes.
The correct solution for the two right wing parties, who refuse any significant community health programs and procedures that have effectiveness, incidentally, was for them to just settle for the most basic and obvious health insurance reforms: no more rescission, no more exclusions for pre-existing conditions etc. If the right wing lawmakers do end up with nothing, it will be what they deserve (but obviously not what we deserve).
At least one and preferably both of the existing right wing parties need to implode, to be replaced by a new non-right-wing party, one that has truly marketable branding not dead on arrival due to propaganda, that will vote in single payer and other real cost controls.
Common sense says a bill this bad cannot pass, but it will. I little tweaking, maybe Mitch McConnell needs a statue or something, maybe a ban on paying for birth control, too--some asinine buying of a vote somewhere, and another bad bill will be passed. Golly, who do we think is more likely to roll over, the allegedly-progressive caucus or the Republicans?
Congress, the original point of all of this was to help Americans afford healthcare. That goal has been so completely lost sight of that you really ought to just start again, this time with options on the table that would include containing the cost of healthcare, which would have to include weighing the benefits of the insurance system, looking at previous deals congress made like the monopoly in the supply chain, and the amount of money being extracted from patients and premium payers that is going to CEO packages and profits. To address none of this is criminally negligent. This bill deserves to fail, so no doubt it will pass as soon as it is made worse.
Love the funding mechanism. Take about $3000/yr out of my pay as a tax on my "Cadillac" plan on top of charging me higher premiums and subsidize less adequate care (only 70% coverage of basic costs) for those slightly poorer than me. I can resent paying the subsidy and those subsidized can resent my coverage. Isn't this beautiful? What kind of posturing millionaire Senators think this is a good idea or that it will hold together politically. Oh, I forgot both our Senators in Pennsylvania think it's a good plan
As a union government employee, I have one of those so-called "Cadillac" plans too. The choice of this tax is deliberate and very telling. It is conceived to discourage comprehensive coverage and encourage people to submit to the insurance company's profitable bare-bones or "consumer driven" plans, which are bankruptcies waiting to happen for most people.
Here's a proposal that'd win overwhelming support:
Health Care guaranteed for life.
No co-pays, deductibles or premiums or limits.
All drugs, dental, vision etc.
Paid for by:
- Raising the tax rate on hedge funds from 15% to 35%.
- Raising the top marginal tax rate on incomes over $5 million to 75%.
- Adding a tax of 2% on all transactions of stocks and options.
This would be a single-payer, not-for-profit plan administered by a public/private consortium.
I could even get the brainwashed tea-baggers on-board for this plan.
One would thing that such generous and for most wage earners, literally free healthcare for all would be wildly popular. But the propaganda machine would simply remind the wage earners that a lazy, un-deserving poor person might get care too, and they would revolt against it. It works every time.
And there is nothing new about it. Recall how 150 years ago, the US south successfully staged a "rebellion" whereby thousands upon thousands of the rural dirt-poor were convinced to shed their blood for the wealthy so the wealthy could continue an extreme reactionary racist system of slavery - something completely contrary to the poor person's interest?
Has there EVER been any such absurd phony "rebellion' turned on it's head in anywhere else in the world?
WTF? It hasn't even been put Together YET, in a single-payer product, as PROMISED by Obama.
It doesn't look like this crappy bill is going to pass anyway. The whole sick debate sums up the utter rottenness and corruption of the entire US political system. HMOs and Big Pharma have dictated the terms of the entire debate, guaranteeing that they win no matter whether the bill passes or not. We the People get screwed again.
And may God bless Corporate Amerika.
Hard to know which side God is on. As the Senate begins its debate let's pray for a sign.
I believe if we were not so toxic we would be able to see clearly to choose life and peace over death and war.
The theatrics going on in Washington are by design to fool you into thinking they care about the people. But do not be fooled. Any healthcare reform that is enacted will benefit the rich. Only.
So true. American's are still in denial about their government being a Democracy. The Great American Divide has been skillfully engineered and people have been so weakened by it that a corporate shadow government has been established. Fema camps, corporate deputies of death, private armies, media propaganda, middle class decline, the survailence state, military operations within our borders, and the Roman Circus of sports are flashing red lights of the presence of Fascism. A harvest of death stalks Americans in the light of day and they refuse to see it. How can any good come from this mix, especially health care. The result will be that we will have to buy our way out of excessively high priced health care that we cannot afford by paying the penalty. Only in America will you hear cheers for tears.
From the article above this one:
"The United States is massively building up its potential for nuclear and non-nuclear strikes in Latin America and the Caribbean by acquiring unprecedented freedom of action in seven new military, naval and air bases in Colombia"
So even as we fight over our healthcare, we, if by we we mean we-americans, we prepare to bomb, even nuke, our neighbors,--even if we achieve reasonable health care, we will continue to kill and kill to maintain what one person named, "the air-conditioned nightmare." We are all complicit.
There will be no serious healthcare reform and it will only get worse after this as the country's elites have moved so far to the right that retrograde democrats who have killed any hope of reform are call 'moderates' by the right wing media.
When 4-5 democrats can deny health care to 44 million, there's something wrong with the system. Maybe we should scrap the Congress, instead of the bill. It's especially vile that it is the democrats who are killing health care reform--because they can clearly do it without a single republican vote. If the democratic holdouts don't change their tune, there should be a Third party surge in 2010 and 2012.
well done...the entire country is run by around 550 corrupt people...
300,000,000 struggling citizens vs. 550 corrupt leaders...
the 550 are very aware of that...are the 300,000,000?
Many good points made above. I agree that these plans are a lot of sound and fury, and will probably achieve little to improve Americans' health or save them money. I've read some of the report by the Congressional Budget Office and while it's all very complex, it's clear that a single-payer (or Medicare for All) system would address most of the problems raised at much lower cost and much more simply.
I will add one observation: the article and many other reports you will hear in the media, both mainstream and "left", tell you that the bill will cost $848 billion. This is supposed to be a sticking point for "fiscal conservatives", both Democrat and Republican, because that is a lot of money. They rarely mention that this is over 10 years (according to the CBO), and they almost never mention that though it will cost the government that much, it will also SAVE roughly the same amount, or slightly more, over the same time period, for a net SAVING, and thus are "revenue neutral". I'm not saying these are good plans overall, just that the debate is tainted by what you might call "selective misinformation". It reminds me of these top-of-the-hour radio news reports where they report a proposal in Washington and then give recorded responses from two Republicans, and nothing more.
What are the Democrats good for? NOTHING...NADA...ZERO..ZILCH.....This so-called health insurance reform which is the most accurate of term out of Obama's own mouth is not "healthcare reform". This so-called "health reform" bill is not only terrible, but, criminal and its only going to harm the poor and disbaled!!!!
You Obama and Democratic Party apologists should be ashamed of yourselves!!!
I am so proud to be in the Green Party and an actual avowed Socialist!!! You Obama and Democratic Party apologists are nothing but DLC-Corporatists and apologists who need to have more shame in your systems.
If you are an Obama and a Democrat don't ever and I mean ever say you are out to help the POOR or DISABLED!!!!
WHO RUNS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY-DNC? THE LOSER NAMED TIM KAINE OF VIRGINIA!!!!!!
SINCE HOWARD DEAN DEPARTED AS THE CHAIR OF THE DNC, THE RNC HAS BEEN KICKING THE DEMOCRATS ASS IN FUNDRAISING......
THE LOSING DEMS ARE BACK TO THE DLC LOSER DAYS WITH THE LIKES OF TERRY MCAULIFFE, RAHM EMANUEL, HAROLD FORD AND TIM KAINE!!!!!!
THE DEMS ARE PATHETIC!!!!
JOIN A REAL LEFT-PROGRESSIVE PARTY---THE GREEN PARTY AND BE ETHICAL ABOUT YOUR POLITICAL VIEWS FOR ONCE AND STOP SUPPORTING THE CORRUPT AND CORPORATIST DEMOCRATIC PARTY WHICH SMELLS LIKE SKUNKS!!!
What an awful charade on the American people....cutting deals so the likes of Lieberman, Landrieu and Ben Nelson go along with it must tell ya something.....
This is truly a bad idea---"healthcare reform" my ass!
I would Vote No because this Bill Sucks!!!! And I don't give a rat's ass whether you agree with me either.
No Liberal should be "happy" today....And if I have to explain it to you well, then check how "liberal" you really are!!!
The disabled and poor people should be very, very concerned over this bill. They should be strenghtening Medicaid for the poor and disabled rather than helping to ruin it. I have seen what Rahm Emanuel has wanted to do with Medicaid and that is to destroy it more so. The disabled and poor have not been figured in here when they pay so much attention to the "needs" of the Insurance companies. This bill should not be so long and confusing either. Who do they think they are kidding? We should all know that long, long bills are dangerous and what they do not say in explicit terms and that long bills aid and abet the big money players. This is nothing BUT A GIFT TO THE PRIVATE CORPORATIONS AND IF THIS WAS NOT THE CASE, THE LIKES OF MAX BAUCUS, MARY LANDRIEU, BLANCHE LINCOLN, JOE LIEBERMAN, AND BEN NELSON WOULD NEVER HAVE AGREED TO THIS!!!!
The Democrats and Obama are HOSTILE TOWARDS THE POOR AND THE DISABLED!!! IT'S NOT IN THE DNA OF THE DLC-DEMOCRATS TO BE ON THE SIDE OF THE POOR AND DISABLED!!!!
I knew Obama would DISMANTLE MEDICARE AND MEDICAID FOR THE ELDERLY, POOR AND DISABLED....HE SAID HE WOULD IN THE CAMPAIGN BUT BRAIN DEAD "PROGRESSIVES-LIBERALS" WERE ASLEEP IN DROOLING ALL OVER HIM!!!!
Obama and his minions like Rahm Emanuel HATE THE POOR AND DISABLED!!!!
You Obama droolers ought to be ashamed of yourselves!!! This BILL HARMS THE POOR AND DISABLED!!!!
WAKE UP IF YOU STILL HAVE A BRAIN IN YOUR HEAD!!!
With the new healthcare bill, Twinkies and other goodies like Soda/Soft drinks may be seen as a health hazard to eat...You know those shopping cards at the Market? Those electronic tracking machines of what you buy at grocery stores could be used by Insurance companies in the future to deny or approve your health coverage.....
They have not told you all this, but mark my words people.....Technology can be abused....
Eat up all your Twinkies and drink those soft drinks Now!!!! Before the Insurance Company Gestapos have their way and you are forced to buy stuff you cannot afford now!!!
Forcing People to Buy Health Insurance is not:
1. a Public Option
2. Single Payer
Not Strenthening Medicare and Medicaid and Teaching Hospitals and Community Health Centers is:
1. Idiotic
2. Typical
3. Insane
Lefty, I share your anger and agree that this bill is worse than none (theater for the unwashed), but vitriol and condescension toward would-be allies is not likely to win converts. I don't think one needs to be Dale Carnegie either, but some empathy for well-meaning-but-crushed Obama supporters will help foster more sympathy and solidarity for your cause.
Obama and his jerky friends like David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel have frozen out Howard Dean from any official position in the party or in the administration....
Without Howard Dean, the Democrats would still be in the minority now....Soon, the Dems led by Rahm Emanuel's poor vision will be back in the minority....
You cannot build a real progressive or liberal party by playing the middle and sucking up to conservative Democrats and Dixiecrats in the south which has been the Obama-Emanuel plan all along.
I am not being condescending.....
I am trying to wake the gullible "liberal-progressives" out of their delusional stupors which is so obvious for all to see!!!
I think it is possible that the civilization we have now will collapse and IF we are lucky, we will be able to eek out an existance from the earth. But some will be living where the earth is destroyed in one way or another. I'm just keeping this in mind, and doing things that will teach my kids how to surive.
Sometimes I think in these terms. There will always be:
ARIES TYPES: I AM; For ego developement( which we all need for normal functioning) these people experieance life as a competition. They experiance life as situations in which they need to PROVE their identiy. In some way or another, they need to compete. It may not be physical but they need to be first. This could be a sense of being a pioneer, an adventureer or a sportsman of some type. Mars rules people like this and in some way they are warriors. Now, it could be that they are warriors for protecting the enviroment, or they could be protecting our country, as a soilder in the armed forces. But in some way they need to compete, fight and prove something.... An Aries needs to develope an INDEPENTDENCE. These people stay dependant, as an infant and cannot stand up for themselve, if they donot get that positive ego development There ego does not develop to assist them in becoming a mature individual.But, there is a positve method to competition and a very aggressive, negative method.
TAURUS TYPES: I HAVE- These peopole will always need to OWN... Establishing stability is essential to their ego development. The core issue is to establish an inner stability, not necessarily outer, by owning objects or land. But, many individuals do not get to that inner self possesed level. There sense of consistancy and stability comes from FINANCIAL resources that create a stable FOUNDATION for them. The extreme negative is greed.
GEMINI TYPES: I THINK - These people need information input and communication us a main focus for them - for ego development. Learning or cognitive development is a focus in their lives. If positive activities in these areas are not available, then they will have learning problems, or thir communications will focus on trivial, (gossip) and their lives can lack direction,will be scattered, etc. A positive example is a deep concern for learning as in teaching or writing.
CANCER TYPES: - I FEEL: These people need EMOTIONAL stability. Some form of sanctuary, a home, a home land(nationalism) is essential for them to feel secure. Family and ancestral connections are part of the situations necessary for strong ego development. If one does not have this and they were not nurtured in an emotionally consistent way, they will have to struggle with the nurturing attribute during thier life times. The egos focus is on learning to nurture and be nurtured.
You see I have given these examples,sorry to stop at these four but I don't want to over do...) because for a long time I have wanted to make the point that there ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD. Yes, we are all aware of this but it goes even deeper. Sometimes I feel that with all the different types needing to go through what ever they need to to GROW, THAT IS WHAT MAKES GETTING OURSELVES ALL ON THE SAME PAGE, SO DIFFICULT...
Some people need to conquer and they GRAVITATE TO THE NEGATIVE OF THEIR CHART(CHARACTER) some need to own EVERYTHING, AND THEY GRAVITATE TO THE NEGATIVE OF THEIR CHART (CHARACTER) some need to gather infomation and then get lost in the process and find learning difficult. They can't put it together or they cannot interpret what is going on around them so they fall into the negative of their chart (character), Some need to be emotional and stay attached to their ancestral, tribal methods, and there fore fall into the negatives of their charts,(character)self protectionsist.
I'm just saying we hve to get to the COMMON HUMAN SOURCES OF OUR EXISTANCE in order to create a cohesive effort. We cannot fix any of this if we donot UNDERSTATND WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE OR IF WE CONTINUE TO DIVIDE OURSELVES BECAUSE OF FEAR OF EACH OTHER AND OUR OWN INNER CONFLICTS.
edit reply report this comment
theinitiate November 22nd, 2009 1:39 pm
won't give up trying to fix our problems in what ever method I can possibly muster. But at the same time, there is a part of me that really thinks that it is unfixable. Partly because it is so late and also because people just don't get it.
Clear-cut Climate states a good discussion, but I really don't think the general public can conceptualize how to live without luxuries of a fossil fuel economy.
Why is CD featuring articles from a right-wing site like politico.com? Articles that call Democratic Party opponents of a public option "centrist" and "moderate?" And why does it now take 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate?
We shouldn't care if the Dems' bill loses and nothing passes at all. We should help that happen. True, it will bring Republican victories in 2010 and 12. But given what the Dems' big majority has and hasn't done, it's hard to care.
Carrie Budoff Brown who once worked at the Hartford Courant before taking a job at the Philadelphia Inquirer is a decent lady.
I knew her when she worked at the Hartford Courant. She is very smart and well informed about many issues. I spoke to her a few times when Budoff worked there covering some local town issues. I did not find her to be ideological at all.
That being said, some reporters may appear to be "ideological" when in fact it's more about their simpliciity covering issues. Many reporters do not have the time to be researchers and they are what they are---reporters on various issues.
Again, I always found Carrie Budoff (Brown-she married after leaving the Hartford Courant) to be very open-minded and actually well-versed on the topic she covered. In all fairness to these reporters they have to not only contend with their editors, but gain approval or copy gets cut out.
The Democrats have General Patton on their Team!!!
What else could go wrong for the Dems when they have General Patton on their team. Yes, General Patton!!!
Caucus Chair John B. Larson of CT has compared Rahm Emanuel to General Patton in political terms...Aren't the Democrats and all their apologists so special to have the one and only Rahm Emanuel DICTATING the Healthcare bill to the House and Senate?
You all think Obama is controlling the shots about this "healthcare reform" debate? Think again. It is Victor Fuchs, Ezekiel Emanuel and Rahm Emanuel controlling every aspect of this so called "healthcare debate."
1. Obama is an empty suit.
2. The Democrats will soon lose their majority in the Congress
3. Obama will end up being not only a failure as president but a one-termer.
Progressives and Liberals need to get out of its delusional stupor and get into some reality.....Progressives and Liberals are as much to blame for the current mess known as the Obama administration as anyone else for keeping your rose colored glasses on so long and never actually examining Obama when he was running for president. Obama said he would be reforming Medicare and Medicaid, which in Washington, D.C. terms means CUTIING and ENDING such programs.
Obama never said he wanted to "end the war in Afghanistan" when running for president either. That was the "good war" according to Obama. You so called liberals and progressives obviously have very selective hearing and blurry eyes when Obama was running for president.
I hope someday in the near future that you so-called "liberals-progressives" wake up and realize that your delusional world does not exist. That you understand these Democrats are worthless and Al Gore ran an awful campaign in 2000. Yes, go back and read the transcripts of the Gore-Bush debates and differentiate who sounded more hawkish and more pro-free trade agreements.
I am so tired of you phony "liberals-progressives" who continue to blame Nader for 2000 rather than understanding that Al Gore pandered to every BIG LOBBY GROUP GOING AND SOUNDED MORE HAWKISH THAN BUSH ON MILITARY AFFAIRS...YOU'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND READ THE DEBATE TRANSCRIPTS AS WELL TO UNDERSTAND THIS.
AL GORE SUPPORTED NAFTA!!!! AL GORE SUPPORTED FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS AND OUTSOURCING POLICIES.....AL GORE SUPPORTED DADT AND THE DOMA AS WELL.....
AL GORE MADE SOME GREAT CHANGES ONCE HE WAS NO LONGER A CANDIDATE OR IN POLITICAL OFFICE WHICH MADE ME LIKE HIM A LOT. UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN IN OFFICE AND HOLDING SOME POLITICAL POWER, AL GORE TOOK THE STANDARD PRO-FREE TRADE AND HAWKSIH VIEWS ON DEFENSE VIEWS.
People compromise with corruption in so many ways, day in and day out. Obama was elected largely on that premise, not because he was thought to be the best candidate, but because McCain was considered to be worse (lesser evilism).
I hope that the current health care packages do go down in defeat, so we can start again from scratch. The American people need to wake up from their brainwashed stupor and vote the bozos and corruptos in Congress out of office. Vote 'em out and then put 'em on trial for malfeasance. We need a new constitutional convention here too. The current system has ceased working and is beyond being rehabilitated. We need a 21st century constitution to replace the 18th century one. If we can't have a new constitution that works for the people and not the special interests I'm in favor of breaking up the country into six or so smaller countries. What we have now is a cancer on the body politic.
You might need to be more explicit about what you'd like to see, rather than what you want to get rid of, because therein would lie the difference between your rant and one coming from the extreme right. For example, they would want to see a white-supremacist, fascist state, and would define "special interests" as those of women, blacks, Jews, gays, and non-Christians, while I presume you might prefer a socialist, inclusive, non-militaristic state which tries to raise up the lower and middle classes, and would define special interests as those of corporations.
We can only hope it falls apart.
Could not be said better.
When the corporate whores finally do pass something, you can bet, they'll be lauding it as the greatest reform in US history.
Indeed, Medicare-for-all, real single-payer, was so simple and easy to sell that it could never even be allowed any public debate in daylight. It would have captured the public imagination immediately, so it had to be quashed deliberately, with Obama's blessing by conspicuous default.
The Democratic Party squandered an enormous opportunity and mandate to show bold vision and leadership on the human rights issue of our time. Instead, they yielded craven obeisance to corporate power---barely even bothering to conceal the corruption of rampant bribery. Once a party for a healthy working middle class, it now serves a kleptocracy with little more than lip service to its former mission. I will never again squander my vote, money, or energy for the equal of two evils.
camus13
Obama's ready with his insurance care speech...............
This is for you, mom."
The Democratic Party is BEYOND PATHETIC FOLKS!!!! HOW DO YOU ALL LIKE THE POST-HOWARD DEAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY? THAT OBAMA STOLE DEAN'S GRASSROOTS IDEAS. THAT THE CHICAGO BOYS LIKE AXELROD AND EMANUEL CRAPPED ALL OVER HOWARD DEAN!!!! SO, HOW DO YOU ALL LIKE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WHICH IS BACK TO ITS SAME CRAP AS IT WAS DURING THE HEYDAY OF THE DLC-CLINTON YEARS. YOU ALL LIKE THE SAME OLE BOYS LIKE GEITHNER AND SUMMERS RUNNING THE WHITE HOUSE AND ALL THOSE JOBS CONTINUING TO LEAVE AMERICA?
YOU HAVE THE IDIOTIC NOTION TO CALL ME ANGRY WHEN I AM JUST POINTING OUT FACT AFTER FACT? PERHAPS YOU DO NOT LIKE THE MIRROR TOO MUCH. THAT'S NOT MY PROBLEM, NOW IS IT?
Again, it's Obama and his jerky friends like David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel have frozen out Howard Dean from any official position in the party or in the administration....
Without Howard Dean, the Democrats would still be in the minority now....Soon, the Dems led by Rahm Emanuel's poor vision will be back in the minority....
You cannot build a real progressive or liberal party by playing the middle and sucking up to conservative Democrats and Dixiecrats in the south which has been the Obama-Emanuel plan all along.
I am not being condescending.....
I am trying to wake the gullible "liberal-progressives" out of their delusional stupors which is so obvious for all to see!!!