EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Secret Physiological Link Between Affinity for Guns & Affinity for Health Insurance Bureaucrats?
What's really amazing about this fairy tale is that it is so ingrained in Washington that it's preposterous supposition isn't even explained - it's just assumed fact, presented as so totally obvious as to go without examination. This story about health care reform from the Wall Street Journal's Naftali Bendavid provides a perfect example of what I'm talking about:
The Blue Dogs' numbers expanded with the election of lawmakers such as North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler, an ex-Washington Redskins quarterback who opposes abortion, gun control and gay marriage...Beyond health care, the Blue Dogs have helped delay a climate-change bill and block legislation that would make it easier for unions to organize...
Rep. Shuler, for his part, said that before agreeing to run, he spoke to Rep. Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer to make sure he'd have the freedom he needed.
"One conversation I had with both of them before coming to Congress was, 'I'm going to vote my district,'" Rep. Shuler said. "It's one of those swing districts that can go either way...They're aware of that."
Notice here that Shuler's entire rationale for siding with multinational corporations and the health insurance industry is "I'm going to vote my district" - or put another way, he's telling us that his rank-and-file working-class constituents supposedly want him to vote with Big Money. And, of course, Bendavid, the loyal D.C. bumlicker, doesn't bother to question the premise whatsoever.
It's just stunning that this is so assumed that neither the politician nor the reporter feels the need to bother explaining how this storyline makes any functional sense at all. As I noted in a Washington Post op-ed a few years ago, polls show many working class cultural conservatives are, in fact, very supportive of universal health care and taking on corporate power in general. And as Nate Silver has pointed out, it's idiotic to assume that just because Blue Dogs represent districts that host competitive elections, it means voters in those districts want corporate whores representing them in Washington.
Nonetheless, the lunacy continues. Evidently, politicians and reporters in Washington have secretly discovered a physiologically causative link between a voter's affinity for guns and their love of health insurance bureaucrats.
UPDATE: You'll note that some progressive Members of Congress are annoyed that even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has echoed Blue Dogs claims that they are shilling for insurance companies because their working-class constituents want them to. Roll Call quotes one progressive lawmaker as saying, "She won't criticize [the Blue Dogs]. She says they're representing their constituents. She's being very careful. But other Members are not being as charitable."
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
81 Comments so far
Show AllThe Blue Dogs are no more democrat than Rush Limbaugh is. They're Red Jackals registered as democrats in order to get themselves elected and in place to throw monkey wrenches in everything the democratic party tries to do.
Well, if they are talking around a water cooler, they have jobs and are probably well-paid white collar workers. They also probably havent gotten a serious illness yet - perhaps after getting laid off.
They have also been heavily indoctrinated into the oh-so USA'n tradition of self absorbtion - never seeing a jobless person or the neighbor gettig foreclosed down the street, and thinking "but for the grace of God go I". Many think me-first attitudes are law of nature, but a chat with a Canadan - even a conservative Canadian, reveals this is not so.
Darn...someone telling the truth. Thanks!
Fine.
Then I hope you will be more sympathetic toward all those Mexicans, Guatamalans, Salvadorans and Hondurans, who consider THEIR families to be #1, and therefore brave a dangerous border crossing to your state to look for work so they can provide for them.
Actually they send their money to their families back home. They have no intention of settling in this country.
also, can you provide the evidence of the US being the "greatest country on earth?"
UNHDR statistics rank the US at 15th in overall human development.
In an Economist Magazine surveys of the livability of cities, no US city makes the top 25 cities. The highest US city - Pittsburgh, ranked at 28.
And no, I don't have sympathy for anyone engaging in reckless driving for any reason, while I do the "illegal" immigrant (whom we all are descended from), who isn't endangering anyones life.
BTW, ever heard of the golden rule? To say "I sympathise wouth you", but if you get thrown in prison or beaten up by vigilaties, tough luck buddy", must involve mind-boggling levels self-deciet. Enjoying the cognitive dissonance yet?
Many do send money back to their extended families, but as to "They have no intention of settling in this country." I believe you are misinformed. Most in my state have exactly that intention. They no longer even go back at all.
Lets just say one of the top two or three counteries in the world. I think thats true enough for anyone.
You might as well throw darts at the wall as use UN statistics for anything.
The Economists knows where the best quality of life is? I doubt it. But Pittsburg before San Antonio or Santa Fe or Charleston, etc.....No Way!
I think anyone that doesn't have sympathy for anyone less fortunate than themselves, that can't understand and sympathize with illegal immigrants motives must be named Cheney. But that has nothing to do with advocating their exploitation. Denying those waiting to come here legally for the same reasons fair play. Or how to pay to support them? Itsd not a matter of sympathy or understanding, its a matter of morality, fairness, law and economics.
The Economist is a British newsmagazine - similar to Time or Newsweek.
I think they like Pittsburgh (but still only 28th overall) because it is closest to a European city in some ways. It has a number of colorful, walkable neighborhoods and a well-transit-served downtown where you can get everything done without needing a car.
It has an abundance of good original restaurants with much less of the corporate chain crap as other US cities. It also has a well-respected arts, music and theatre scene.
But you are right these things aren't too important to Texans. Who would want to stroll a couple shady blocks to the Italian grocery store or to the farmer's market, stopping in the local pub for any of dozens of Pennsylvania microbrews, when you can drive 10 miles on a busy freeway in 115F heat to a Wal-Mart Supercenter and thence another 5 miles to a TGI Fridays?
And you better provide a source for you flippant information that research by UN agencies is so worthless.
You think Texas is the worst? Sir, you should try Oklahoma. Texas looks like Europe in pale comparison.
Darn Peter, Oklahoma's not that bad. I always found lots of nice folks there. Maybe we need to send some of the Californians moving here to you guys?
I was wondering about OK myself. If OK was so mean, Lubbock would have been just as bad when I visited it a few years ago. I don't think that just dumping poor people from one state to another just like that is a good idea. A better idea would be to try to relate to people in non-political tones. Every place has its set of closed minds but you would be surprised to find out just how many ordinary conservatives actually want to see single payer being enacted. I still believe that Oklahomans have a heart for it deep down inside and especially the ones with Native American blood.
Check your facts sir. More jobs have been moved to out of this country and permanently. The US has indeed been the greatest country in producing terrorists and WMDs but on education, healthcare, etc ... ? Why do poor people who work hard get punished while rich people don't do jack shit and they get rewarded? Hate to burst your bubble but the US has already lost its status in being the greatest nation on this planet thanks to Iraq, Afghanistan, and more economic instability. You're welcome to keep dreaming and lying to yourself since this nation is living off borrowed time and money.
To whatever extent the scramble for admission reflects any true understanding of the socio-political environment it's not hard to see how it provides positive feedback and self-perpetuation. Whether the resulting concentration of the like-minded makes it "the best", however, remains somewhat doubtful from a global perspective.
Reply:
1. Your remark about social mobility in the US may have been true several decades ago, but not now. A study a couple years ago (I'll look it up presently) showed that there is greater upward social/class mobility in western European countries than the US. It's social programs, much-higher educational standards, and free university education are beleived to contribute to this.
2. Canada, Australia and Western Europe (even Ireland) all have as high or higher levels of opportunity-seeking immigration than the US.
1. Personal anecdotes don't demonstrate anything.
2. I'm talking about comparable populations. And no one is arguing that better opportunities don't exist in the US than the dirt-poor-and getting poorer (due to US economic and foreign policy) Mexico and Central America, or the Carribean. Of course if a poor Mexican is going to become an economic refugee, are they going to the US rahther than across an ocean.
Do you see any Germans, French, Spanish, Japanese, Australians, or Canadians trying to come over here as immigrants?
"Do you see any Germans, French, Spanish, Japanese, Australians, or Canadians trying to come over here as immigrants?"
I know you know there are. But indeed most immigrants go from a poorer country to a richer countrty. NAFTA diodn't help South America and Mexico, in fact the damn thing killed the Mexican corn farmer among other things, butv lets not miss the primary problem in these countries, their own governments and their own elite rich that don't want to share at all.
We have a lot of immigration from Mexico because she is right nexrt to us and besides that our families have been mixed for hundreds of years, almost since we got to Texas. A lot of our immigrants in Texas are from Mexico. Unfortunately, a lot of our illegal immigrants are from there too.
Yep NAFTA and their own Corrupt Government is the poor Mexicans greatest enemy. But this is what CAPITALISM demands. You posted in another place Capitalism lead to more eglatarianism.
SHARING the wealyh with everyone is a tenet of Socialism. Capitalsim feels it distorts the marketplace and leads to "unproductive taxataion".
pjd4
I would say I'd bet it was a European study. Let me assure you that the chance for upward mobility for most, let alone immigrants is far lower than the US. Prime example of the problem...try to open a business in France....Good God, you wouldn't believe whats required.
The fact that their educationasl standards asre higher is our fault for sure. We ought to be ashamed at whats been done to our schools.
I also believe you'll find many changes going on there in Europe, many of the things you are speaking of are changing.
I know the Economist well!
"Who would want to stroll a couple shady blocks to the Italian grocery store or to the farmer's market, stopping in the local pub for any of dozens of Pennsylvania microbrews, when you can drive 10 miles on a busy freeway in 115F heat to a Wal-Mart Supercenter and thence another 5 miles to a TGI Fridays?"
Me! Me! Me!
I hate Walmart, refuse to go there, don't hate TGI Fridays but don't go there either. And its only been 104 here!! YUK!
I take back my remark about Pittsburg. Its been many years since I was there, but I loved the food.
But in defense of us poor ole Texans I'll stack any of our symphonies up against anybody, music in general for quality and diversity, better.....now they may have us on the theater scene. We've got some good ones, but not that many.
But picking Pittsburg before a Texas city, it hurts the ole Texas pride! They don't have good Mexican food....I rest my case!! (lol)
And our hottest day so far this summer has been 88 degrees. Even in a normal summer, it only gets to 90 or higher 6 days out of the season. Tomatos aren't doing very well up here though.
88.... Jeeezzzeeee! Winter! Our tomato's are not doing at all. Nobody seems to know why.
I forgot to say my remark about the UN stats wasn't being flippant, I've found them to be faulty so many times I quit paying attention to them years ago.
By the way I don't mean to butt in so much, but I find ya'lls discussion interesting. I've picked up a couple of ideas already.
You should try topsy turvey for growing tomatoes if you don't have a good garden to grow them on. :)
We've got a good Garden Jennifer, but no ones tomato's are doing that well. No reason that any of us can figure out. There are a few sections that are. but not most.
Ouch. I'm surprised to see that going on in TX. Good luck on getting the garden back to normal.
P.S.: I wonder if mixing hemp protein powder (it's usually non-THC and found in most organic grocery stores) with the soil might help the tomatoes out.
Will try it, thanks.
Uh....its not just Latinos immigrasting illegally. I wish we could put that Canard to bed.
And yes I have great sympaty for these folks, I'd wager I know far, far more of them and have worked beside far more of then than you have. I understand exactly why they come here, they have come here all my life, the difference is now they are coming to stay not just to provide for their families. In fact they are bringing their families along.
If you have any sympathy for these folks I fail to see how you support business in their exploitation of these poor people. I just don't understand that kind of mindset.
I don't like the exploitation either. But historically it was the poor. underpaid, wage-undercutting immigrants in the mines and mills - the Bohunks, the Dagos, the Micks, the Polacks, who also started the labor movement, ultimately improving the lives of us all.
Even today, latino immigrants make up a large part of the ranks of union organizing efforts.
Most are Latinos in my state simply because we are on the border. Your historical context is quite correct. But I'm speaking only of illegal immigrants that are displacing American workers and taking their place in some of the bad unions that break the law.
We have tons of Latino, actually mostly Hispanic Americans, though they say Mexican American, they are certainly proud of their heritage! Most are not happy about illegal immigration either, its keeping a lot of their kids from getting jobs and in some cases losing their own jobs. You ought to hear what they say!
Unlike back then its business that is using these poor folks to beat up both the American worker and the illegal. They cheat both for their profit. I'd jail that bunch so fast.......
You haven't lived till you've had Green Enchiladas instead of Tex-Mex. Wahoo! It will light you up!! First time I had them was at an illegals house actually, a couple of brothers I was working with while I was out of school. God they spent an hour laughing at me drinking water. Getting nostalfgic I guess, don't know any other reason to say that......except if anybody offers you a Green Enchilada, make sure you have ice handy.
In a society where everyone thinks tht way, virtually everyone, except for the most ruthless thugs at the top, lose. The end-stage of such thinking can be seen in savage places like Honduras or El Salvador.
In countries where people dont think that way, the economic security of their familys is much better.
By not supporting, say universal healthcare for all, a person is instead opting to burden their family with higher insurance and medical costs than the tax increases would be. (about $7500 avrg per person in the US, versus about $4000 per person in universal healthcare countries)
And god help your family if you are out of work for a while.
Why do you want a "choice of how I pay for your healthcare needs", when you could enjoy not having to pay anything for your healthcare needs, even in a catastrophic situation? Do you worry about having to "pay" for the streets and roads in your community? The parks? The Police and Fire? Trash pickup (if it is publicly provided), cleaner air, cleaner rivers, safe food, safe appliances and building materials in your home? Government provided all these things without you having to shop around at all.
pjd412
"when you could enjoy not having to pay anything for your healthcare needs, even in a catastrophic situation?"
Are you suggesting that the health care you are suggesting would be free or of the same quality and extent?
I'm not quite clear about what you are saying here, if you don't mind my asking?
Both.
Just like France, the UK, or Sweden or Canada. And, did you read yesterday's article on Finnish healthcare?
I have had a couple co-workers where I work get terminal illness (Pancratic cancer) They had to work to the bitter end, while constantly dealing with medical bill and insurance probelms. This does not happen anywehre else in the civilized world, where money never comes up at all all the energy of the doctor and patient can be focused on either getting better or saying goodbye.
Gotcha, thanks.
Yes I did read it. I'll take it!
I would like to point out that it is not free as my friend above points out. Nothing is free.
But I certainly take your point about sick folks having to work while sick and worse having to deal with these curs at the insurance companies at the same time. Its hard enogh trying to fight sickness without havein to fillout papers every other day or trying to make sense of senseless questionaires and forms.
Damn em!
Health care in the United States costs approximately DOUBLE the average cost of all of the western democracies that provide single-payer health care. Under single-payer your taxes might go up, but your health insurance premiums would end. The cost of single-payer would be spread across all taxpayers. Nothing is "free" and I hate it when people talk about "free health care" or "free education". It all has to be paid for, but why do we insist on paying DOUBLE what others pay when we could have the same care for less money on average?
Thanks! Good points!! I feel the same.
I know of no one who ges or would ask for, an MRI for a sprain.
And having ccess to the latest and greatest (if it is indeed the case) seems to produce better outcomes, which mostly are better in single-payer countries. Life expectancy certainly is higher there than the US.
And the malpractice-defensive medicine is largely insurance company driven. Who starts most malpractice suits? If it works like car-crashes, it is the insurance companies.
Only a Big Insurance/Pharma shill would rant about trial lawyers. Trial lawyers are a very small fraction of the health care mess while Big Insurance/Pharma are the real culprits.
Well la-di-da. Lucky able-bodied, sound minded you. You've got yours. To the rest of us "YOYO. You're on your own." Just because special, rugged individualist you doesn't like change, not matter how much better that might work out for the rest of us. EXCUSE ME, but what are you doing posting here? Why don't you wander over to Move On or some other pseudo-liberal site.
I'm guessing a lot of people who "think" they are happy with their health insurance, think that because the have not had to use it for much yet.
I know at my last job anybody who actually used it for anything other than a checkup thought it stunk. All kinds of deductions and co-pays. I worked with a lot of skiing, well-paid, white collar workers. Several of them racked up thousands of dollars in medical bills when they had big time crashes on the slopes. I didn't ski that much, but I finally gave it up completely because it just wasn't worth the potential medical bills if I hurt myself doing it.
Also all those folks standing around the cooler that are "happy" with their employer based health care need to be reminded that it all goes away if they leave their job for any reason. And I hear thats happening a lot of late.
"most people are scared to death of this healthcare plan because most of them are happy with the insurance they have, and think we are too broke to pay for it."
Polling shows that a majority of Americans support single payer over the "public option".
http://www.healthcare-now.org/another-poll-shows-majority-support-for-single-payer/
Good article that only scratches the surface of this phenomenon.
There really should be no connection between cultural conservatism and pro-corporate economic "conservatiism" (really neo-liberalism). I think the reason is that culutral conservatism is used priimarily as a cynical tool by the consvertave leasders, and their army of underlings on the radio and TV, to keep the uninformed and religion-bound rabble distracted. They also know very well to keep to the cultural issues, because a class-conscious economic populism simmers just below the surface (one can see hints of it in these otherwise comically incoherent "tea parties") - so they dare not go there! The blue-dog Democrats know very well that if they oppose corporate power, support unionization, or support action on global warming, they will be viciously attacked for... being pro abortion, pro gay, and "anti-gun and ant-God.
Meanwhile, even after all these years of conservative-majority governments and presidents the cultural conservative agenda has not been significantly advanced- yet they never get attacked for this!
Conservatism in the US should not be thought as a consistent ideology at all - it is more a clever system of PR and mass deception run for the benefit of the economically powerful.
It's probably true that people who have insurance that's working for them don't want to rock the boat for fear they'll somehow get pitched overboard. The people who are underinsured or have no insurance whatsoever -- well, they show up in news reports now and then, usually with an "isn't that tragic" spin to the story. Sometimes if they get their story on TV, someone comes to their rescue, puts up a website, raises money for them, and saves their day. The rest of the un- and underinsured continue to die in the waiting rooms of overstressed Emergency Hospitals.
A media-generated myth of an "affinity" between cultural conservatism and corporate whoredom of the blue dog Democrats? Hmm, I'd have to think about that, particularly whether its a myth of a reality, based on blue voting records on "cultural" and economy-based issues. It reminds me a bit of the Tom Frank "What's the Matter With Kansas?" which seems to be that the cultural conservatives have trumped the economic populism of a state like Kansas by leading Kansans into voting their religious beliefs rather than their economic interests. Maybe blue dogs here as elsewhere have just learned how to cash in on the "Kansas" game that the Republicans invented. I believe I've seen that a disproportionate number of blues came from red states in this last election. If blue dog Democrats have the asserted affinity, it seems that the Republicans have already displayed it and have been duly noted for having done so, at least by Frank.
What really burns my own tail is the inability of the punditocracy to place responsibility for the failure of the health care reform effort at the feet of that neglected color of Democrats, the "yellow" (once a Democrat, always a Democrat) variety. These are the people who, as I would define them (from close association, I was one of them for 50 years until I "turned Green") as associating anything with a Party label as something to be supported, no matter if it benefits the "classes" (wealthy and powerful) more than it benefit the "masses" that the party supposedly represents. (Unfortunately there's no color yet invented for that miniscule band of "progressive" Democrats who do represent a populist constituency.)These are the MoveOn.org and Organizing for America type Democrats who marshal their yellow dog faithful to go to the mat to support a "public option" in the health care reform plan which is nothing really but a sop to the "ideals" of the party to be a populist party without really challenging the power of the power elite who are to be the real beneficiaries of this "reform." Since yellow dogs tend at the same time to be "cultural liberals," there's an affinity for Sirota and others to ponder.
Jerry D Rose
(Unfortunately there's no color yet invented for that miniscule band of "progressive" Democrats who do represent a populist constituency.)These are the MoveOn.org and Organizing for America type Democrats who marshal their yellow dog faithful to go to the mat to support a "public option" in the health care reform plan which is nothing really but a sop to the "ideals" of the party to be a populist party without really challenging the power of the power elite who are to be the real beneficiaries of this "reform." Since yellow dogs tend at the same time to be "cultural liberals," there's an affinity for Sirota and others to ponder.
A. How about "Green" Dogs?
As for the rest I'm glad others see this for what it really is!
dreambait: Thanks for the history lesson, I needed it, but it didn't entirely change my view of the nature of these "colors"
1. Yellow dog: the "damn yellow" dog is the relevant term, not the fact they were conservative. Like you said, as in rural southern Oklahoma where I grew up people just were Democrats; everybody remembered "Hoover" and the disaster of the depression and my grandmother said "Republicans just don't look right!" I never had any reason to disagree with her, even when I turned "Green."
2. Blue dog: hadn't heard that choking anecdote but this sounds very much like the Dixiecrats from the 1948 era; makes it the more interesting to me that some or most the recent ones have come from western states and haven't been particularly racist-oriented.
(Unfortunately there's no color yet invented for that miniscule band of "progressive" Democrats who do represent a populist constituency.)
__________________________________
May I suggest black and blue?
· Yr Obd't Servant
YOB: black and blue? Works for me. Jerry
I love the use of the term 'Corporate Whores' when speaking of US 'elected representatives. But a more accurate comparison could not be found.
So, America, if YOU are the ones who elect the "Whores"---and still you don't 'get what you want'---
Why not try something you never have tried before?
Either eliminate the 'johns' who are biddding for the 'whores favors'---or simply--- 'out bid' the 'johns'.
I mean come on; how much can a 'good blow job be worth'?
Good Luck America, you really need it.
According to Sirota its a myth that if you oppose this travesty of a health care plan it makes you a huge fan of health insurance corporations? That if you oppose an energy tax in the middle of a recession you love air pollution? That their districts being culturally and economically conservative would embrace policies like these is the myth.
These guys are voting their districts interests and opinions.
Portaying this health care bill...any of them as "reform" or this energy tax bill as "climate change legislation" is both dishonest and a service to business interests.
I only hope we have enough honest politicians left to defeat these very bad pieces of legislation.
"These guys are voting their districts interests and opinions."
I think they are voting their own interests and the interests of their class. They don't give a rat's ass about their poor or powerless constituents, except to neutralize their votes.
Joe
Exactly my sentiments. It's not complicated. It's corruption. Our congress has an overwhelming majority of criminals. These criminals changed the law so they could legally accept bribes. Their constituency is ,in fact, the lobbyist bribers. So, in a convoluted, corrupt sense, they ARE VOTING THEIR CONSTITUENCY.