The Only Thing Republicans Really Hate About ‘Obamacare’ is ‘Obama’

obamacare_lies

It’s no secret that the most loathsome character in the extraordinarily loathsome U.S. House of Representatives is Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX). In case you’re not aware of Stockman, he’s the first term congressman from Ron Paul’s former district in Texas who invited Ted Nugent to the State of the Union and who produced a bumper sticker calling for the arming of fetuses to prevent abortions (a not-so-veiled statement about killing abortion doctors).

It’s also no secret that this week was perhaps one of the most dismal polling weeks for members of Congress. The polling has been so horrendous it led bipartisan pollsters for both NBC News and the Wall Street Journal to refer to Thursday’s numbers as “jaw-dropping.”

In spite of the harrowing numbers, including ones that suggested dog poop and hemorrhoids are better than Congress, Mr. Stockman tweeted this:

“57% of Americans oppose ObamaCare. @BarackObama and @TheDemocrats call them ‘terrorists’ and refuse to open the government.”

Let’s do the second part first. I’ve never heard the president refer to Americans as “terrorists,” and the only Americans who some congressional Democrats have compared to terrorists are the congressional Republicans. But, naturally, the House Republicans only make up around 0.00007 percent of the American population. So right there, Mr. Stockman is just making things up.

Now the first part. Mr. Stockman tweeted that 57 percent of Americans oppose Obamacare. He didn’t provide a link, so I initially didn’t know what poll he was referring to. But I looked it up and, sure enough, Stockman was right. It’s from a CNN poll released on October 1. And since Mr. Stockman seems to enjoy quoting poll numbers, let’s give him some poll numbers to tweet.

-In the same CNN poll, only 34 percent of Americans want Congress to de-fund Obamacare.

-In the latest NBC News & Wall Street Journal poll, released hours after Stockman’s tweet, the Affordable Care Act is only seen unfavorably by 43 percent of Americans — this after two weeks of filibusters, demagoguery and an amplified misinformation campaign against the law.

-Also in the NBC/WSJ poll, Stockman’s tea party has an approval rating of 21 percent. The congressional Republicans didn’t fare much better with an approval of 24 percent.

-Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), a member of Stockman’s Texas delegation, has an approval rating of 14 percent. Speaker Boehner’s approval is slightly better at 17 percent.

-Comparatively, the dreaded Obamacare law has an approval rating of 38 percent, gaining seven points from last month. In other words, Obamacare is significantly more popular than the Speaker of the House, the congressional Republicans, Ted Cruz and Stockman’s tea party caucus.

Stockman and Nugent.

Stockman and Nugent.

What’s holding the “Obamacare” numbers down? It makes perfect sense that it’s not as popular as it should be. First, the Republicans have been engaged in a coordinated, well-financed campaign to demonize it since 2009. Secondly, as we’ve observed, the word “Obamacare” has been so thoroughly stigmatized that many (uninformed) people reject it based on the pejorative title alone. But what happens when voters are polled on various aspects of the law?

-In a 2012 poll, 80 percent of Republicans — yes, Republicans — like the idea of health insurance marketplaces, also known as “exchanges.”

-Likewise, 57 percent of Republicans like the idea of the government helping to pay the cost of premiums via insurance subsidies.

-54 percent of Republicans like the employer mandate — the same mandate which the congressioanl Republicans almost universally oppose, including Mr. Stockman.

Should I go on?

-78 percent of Republicans support the ban on denying insurance to people with pre-existing conditions.

-This one is an eye-opener. 29 percent of Republicans think Obamacare “doesn’t go far enough.”

The only aspect of Obamacare that Republican voters dislike is the individual mandate. But I’m sure they’d feel differently if they were informed that Republicans invented the mandate. Richard Nixon, in his 1974 “Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan,” proposed to make it mandatory for businesses to provide health insurance for all full-time employees. In 1989, a document called “Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans” was drafted by Stuart Butler. In it, Butler proposed the idea of an individual mandate. I should note that Butler was a Distinguished Fellow and Director for the Center for Policy Innovation at the conservative Heritage Foundation. In the early 1990s, Republicans such as Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, Richard Lugar and Alan Simpson proposed a counter-measure to Hillary Clinton’s healthcare proposal. The GOP legislation contained an individual mandate and government subsidies.

On second thought, I’d like to correct that thing I wrote about how the individual mandate is the only aspect of Obamacare that Republicans (suddenly) dislike. They mainly dislike the “Obama” part of the word “Obamacare.” And that’s the point of this little exercise. The dissatisfaction with, and outright hatred of Obamacare has little to do with the law itself. It has everything to do with the president who proposed it and who shepherded it through Congress. If that president had been named “Bush” or “Reagan” or even, heaven forbid, “McCain” or “Romney,” Republicans would be demanding, “Keep your government hands off my Dubyacare!”

As for Stockman, I suppose the silver lining is that he wastes so much time on Twitter instead of, you know, legislating.

Make sure to like The Daily Banter on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!

Bob Cesca is the managing editor for The Daily Banter, the editor of BobCesca.com, the host of the Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show podcast and a Huffington Post contributor.

  • negro domis

    OBAMA IS A RACIST BASTARD NIGGER. FOCK YOU. I BET YOU ARE A WELFARE DEPENDENT WHITE NIGGER.

  • Jeff Tilley

    Well, since you, Mr. Bob, presume to speak for me (a conservative), I’ll just go ahead and let you in on you the following: there is nothing whatsoever about Obama or his supporters or his agenda that I don’t oppose will all sincerity. The word “hate”, however is YOUR word. As a liberal, you built it and you own it. It will take decades – if not generations – to undo to this country what Obama unleashed in just a few short years. And yes, when the pendulum does swing back to the right (and trust me, it will) I hope to be in the vanguard grinds you liberals into the ground you have proven you so richly deserve. It will be difficult to be magnanimous in the face of the havoc you and your masters have wrought. Game on, Sir!

  • TrevorLyman

    The reason I don’t like Obamacare is because it’s a national program. How many years do you all give it until the system is completely corrupted? You DO agree that many other branches of federal gov are corrupted right? There is the military industrial complex, the prison complex (fueled by the drug war), etc. You really expect me to believe the healthcare system with all it’s trillions of dollars at stake won’t be corrupted, if it hasn’t been already? and that people won’t suffer greatly because of that? If you want socialized medicine just do it at the state level. That way it’s fixable when things go wrong. Just ask yourself how many positive changes have taken place at the federal level as compared to the state level over the past few decades and it should become pretty clear that state level politics are much more responsive to the people.

    • Lady Willpower

      “The reason I don’t like Obamacare is because it’s a national program.”

      You must really hate the military.

      • TrevorLyman

        You don’t need to put words into my mouth to try and discredit what I have to say. I don’t hate the people in the military. But I would say that the military as an organization is very corrupt and that it is used to secure profits for large corporations much more than it is used for national defense. So, you’re example actually proves my point, national programs are more easily corrupted than local programs. I would love to see a much smaller standing national army and a greater focus on trade with foreign nations. You don’t usually see two nations with strong economic ties going to war with one another.

  • Pete

    Such horsesh!t can only come from the same type of people who wrote that unconstitutional POS._Of course they probably believe the story about SEAL team 6 killing Bin Ladin in that Pakistani compound, and burying his body at sea too (how intelligent ;- )

  • norapettingill

    It is just too rich to read the hateful posts here about how the right hates. No one can spew bile and hate like extremist lefties. It is great entertainment in absurdity. You do have to wonder, however, what kind of dark life led these regressives to see the world through such an ugly distorted prism. But it does also remind one of how lofty lefty utopian aspirations quickly turn into self-righteous totalitarian chaos….and death and mayhem. Just get a government big enough controlled by the “right people”.

  • Lana

    You failed to mention right-wing lap dogs including the Teamster’s Union opposed this too.

  • Lady Willpower

    No rational human being could smile while standing next to Ted Nugent.

  • norapettingill

    The extremists always make their point by showing the far extremes of their opponents. It stirs hatred and emotion, not thoughtful solutions. Yes, we Americans have decided to invest in the health of our citizens. But we feel the same way about fiscal health. Balance please.

    • feloniousgrammar

      Fiscal health and physical health are inseparable.

    • Pink No More

      Our fiscal health depends on ending the cycle of debt that healthcare has devolved into. Do your research.

    • Lady Willpower

      And the Republican plan is…?

    • http://www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go Bob Cesca

      The budget deficit has been cut in half since 2009.

  • Pink No More

    My, but cons get hurt in the ass when you tell them the truth.

  • John D

    What a bunch of lies and rhetoric! FYI, I am among the multi-million US Patriots that Steve Stockman represents! Mr. Stockman is one of the few in Congress who has upheld his word as well as his oath of office! Steve is staying in Congress for a long, long time to come, and true Americans everywhere are behind him! The media lies as does Obama. Obama caused this shutdown. Everything is passed Congress to reopen the FED, except ObamaCare! Obama is nothing more than a butt hurt little child tyrant throwing his tantrum! Stay strong, Steve and the rest of the GOP!

    • Tynamite

      Would you care to provide more specifics and citations as to what you believe are lies? The author of this piece cited sources. I remember the right saying how all the polling was wrong leading up to the election, and that the media lies. And what happened? It was pretty much spot on.

      I believe you have this a bit twisted. The Affordable Care Act was passed by congress, signed in to law by the president, and upheld as constitutional by the supreme court. Not to mention it was the centerpiece to Obama’s re-election campaign, and he won. The debate has already happened. It’s over and done with. Obama has even said he is willing to negotiate on it but not with a government shutdown as the bargaining chip. We all want the law improved, and it can be with level-headed debate. The only people who are “butt hurt” are members of the Tea Party who didn’t get their way and don’t know how to handle it. They are losing the game and are essentially taking their ball and going home. The “rest of the GOP” is already pissed at the tea party and are fracturing. Pretty fun to watch if what they were doing wasn’t so tragic.

      • John D

        Obama Care is NOT funded. This is why our Constitution has our Fed set up that Congress shall control the purse strings, being the most democratic branch of the US Government. Everything has already been voted on and passed, but Obama is throwing a hissy fit, simply because there is no funding for ObamaCare. 51,000 people have gotten in, out of a country of what? 300 million + people? I won’t get that garbage!

        And Obama is upset, because the TEA PARTY took control of Congress, which cuts off ObamaCare. So how is the Tea Party, butt hurt? Obama is the one spending overtime to Federal workers, shutting down VA Memorials, which are unmanned and open 24/7/365 days. He is a vindictive dictator. He has a number people can call in to “report those who are dissenters”. That is socialism. He wants to take our 1st and 2nd Amendment rights away, to start. He funds Syrian Rebels, Libya’s Rebels and every member of the “Muslim Brotherhood” that takes control then begins executing Christians. Obama has done nothing but lied from day one. I know this will be voted down too, and I am glad! I want to upset those who are siding with a TRAITOR. Because when blood hits the pavement, you will remember these words.

        • Tynamite

          They took control of congress? They are in the minority by a long shot. Also, where did you get that 51k number? In the New York Post this morning they said 40k New Yorkers in just the first week. That’s one state. And estimate 1 million of the 2.7 million uninsured will sign up.

          Thinly veiled threats of violence are no way to move the conversation forward. I also really wish you would support these outlandish claims with better evidence.

        • sancholibre

          No. The ACA is funded separately from regular budget appropriations, as is Social Security, etc. Despite what you think politically, the Democrats built the separate funding into the law partially so that issues like this shutdown would never become valid. Do you really think that it would not be separately funded? It took a half-century to pass healthcare reform, this is a teeball move to keep it around, any half-witted politician would do the same. Pay attention, the funding issue is not debatable, it is a plain fact and you can read it for yourself, since you are obviously misinformed.

        • Vipsanius

          spam

    • Pink No More

      Poe.

      • Treading_Water

        Isn’t Poe unique to fundamentalists? There needs to be a wingnut corollary to Poe, perhaps the Bachmann addendum, that states that there is no way to tell the difference between a teapublican zealot and someone satirizing a teapublican zealot.

    • http://www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go Bob Cesca

      Word salad.

    • John D

      Truth hurts, doesn’t it? :) Enjoy! lol

      • Vipsanius

        John D has trolled itself

    • Christopher Foxx

      …and true Americans everywhere …

      Explain for me, please, what a “true” American is. Is someone who was born in the US, pays their taxes and has never broken the law a “true” American? What if they vote for Democrats? Still “true”?

    • sancholibre

      I grew up in his district and remember Stockman from the 90s. The reality is that even this district is more polarized than this commenter realizes or is willing to admit. Stockman has been a hated hometown boy for a long time, if he was so beloved he would have already been in Congress longer than his initial term in the 90s. The guy has lost multiple times in different attempts at becoming a Representative, and one time even failed to get enough support to have his name just placed on the ballot. The only other time he served in Congress was the year the district was declared unconstitutional by way of racial gerrymandering. Stockman is a joke, and always will be.

    • Vipsanius

      you have described yourself

  • Lionel Hutz

    Is it possible that all of the exposed Obama lies are proving the conservatives right? Don’t you remember the “your premiums wont go up” promise? Or how about the “you’ll get to keep your own doctor” promise. Or how about the “its not a tax, you-just-have-to-pay-for-it-or-we-take-your-money” promise?

    • That River Gal

      Cite your sources for these being “lies”.

      • That River Gal

        Nah, just thumb it down. And stuff. Typical.

    • kfreed

      Is it possible that you’ve gotten your bullshit talking points from the Tea Party Patriots/Freedomworks “Defunding Obamacare Tool Kit”??????

    • Lady Willpower

      My premiums went down. I kept my own doctor. And I don’t care what you call it, I’m happy to have affordable insurance.
      What’s the Republican health care solution again? Oh, yes. “Get rich enough so it doesn’t matter what you pay. And if you’re not rich, it must be because you don’t like to work!”

      Funny how you guys all pretend to be such adherents of Jesus Christ. Jesus would be THE biggest proponent of single-payer health care. Republicans would rather just let poor people starve and let sick people die, all while claiming to speak for the Man Upstairs. Meanwhile we lazy Democrats are doing the real Christian thing.

      • feloniousgrammar

        YAY!!!

    • Vipsanius

      Prove these lies of yours.
      provide documentation
      provide sworn depositions.
      publically post them here.

  • Lionel Hutz

    How ironic that an article about hatred and bias is full of left-wing comments using derogatory terms like “wingnuts” and “tea baggers” and “white trash”.

    Hypocrite-much?

    • Lady Willpower

      Oh, get over it. Spend 5 minutes at Twitchy if you want to see some REAL vitriol.

      • Lionel Hutz

        “Get over it”?

        Same could be said for you hair-trigger, nervous breakdown, hand-wringing internet cry babies. America has some people who aren’t Socialists. And will fight for what they believe in.

        Get over it.

        • Lady Willpower

          Phew! I’m glad to see you don’t like derogatory terms.
          Anyway, your side already lost. Twice. Now you’re just practicing treason.

        • kfreed

          Yeah, get over it. The victim schtick is beyond boring already.

          Besides which, ya’ll dubbed YOURSELVES “tea baggers”… we think it’s funny. As for white trash… been noticing a whole lot of Tea Party racists dishing it… so, oh well.

          • Lady Willpower

            My favorite is when Michelle Malkin posts one of her tedious “What happened to the New Tone?” posts over at Twitchy, where she complains about all the OMG MEAN LANGUAGE of liberals. Then you check the comments and it’s 100 different ways to call Michelle Obama a fat gorilla. But they want to know where the New Tone went.

          • D_C_Wilson

            It’s like when they say something hateful and when they get called on it, they start crying things like, “What happened to liberal tolerance” or “You’re trying to suppress my freedom of speech!”

          • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

            “Help, Help! I’m being oppressed!”

          • kfreed

            Michelle “Outhouse Breath” Malkin demanding we moderate our “tone”? ROFLMAO. Seriously, I just spit on the ‘puter screen.

          • feloniousgrammar

            Being a reactive victim is a classic move for sociopaths.

        • D_C_Wilson

          Once again, please define the word “socialist” for the class.

          • Lady Willpower

            “Socialist: taking my hard earned money and spending it on poor people and other stuff I don’t like. Totally OK to spend that money on corporate bailouts or buying lots of bombs to drop on Arabs, though.”

          • D_C_Wilson

            I was going to go with: “A word used as a kneejerk response to anything in politics that I don’t like,” but yours works, too.

          • That River Gal

            ^This.

        • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

          And there it is…it always comes out in the long run…the not so veiled threat of violence…that they’ll take back their country from “us”, the “others”.

          “And will fight for what they believe in.”

          Make my day, why don’t ya.

        • feloniousgrammar

          Obama won twice. Get over it.

        • Vipsanius

          get a grip

      • kfreed

        LOL. You threw him for a loop… they’re used to pity.

    • Vipsanius

      pot kettle black

  • Lionel Hutz

    Really? How old are you? Do you forget “Hillarycare”, which Republicans also hated? And do you remember when Republicans faught against Kerry for his support of government healthcare? Pushing racism drives ratings, and clicks, to your article, but the whole “Everyone who disagrees with Obama’s liberal programs is just a racist” screed is played out. Maybe try some logic in your diet. And some history. And some research.

    • CL Nicholson

      No, nobody has forgot. Its just pointing out that ‘the black guy got it done’ is adding fuel to that fire. And even the fight against 90′s “Hillary-Care” was rooted in the idea that undeserving Negroes and Hispanics would be to get free abortions or whatever. It all comes back to racism, sexism, homophobia and xenophobia.

      • Lionel Hutz

        So if you are black, and against it, are you racist against your own race? Just curious.

        • kfreed

          If you’re black and against it, you’re probably Allen West. #NotOurFault

        • CL Nicholson

          In the media sphere, if you’re a vocal anti “ObamaCare” POC, You’re either a self-serving Black conservative who never really cared about your community (Allen West, Clarence Thomas) or a self-serving Black ‘progressive’ media pundit who’s angry because they’re not the center of attention (Cornell West, Tavis Smiley).

          Most black people I’ve against Obama care hardcore conservatives who simply hate everything about Obama OR true believer far lefties who hate everything about Obama.

        • Vipsanius

          none of your business

    • D_C_Wilson

      Bob didn’t saything about anyone being racist. He just said they dislike Obama. He didn’t say it was because of race, but it’s interesting that you assumed that it was. Might say more about you than it does about him.

    • kfreed

      Nah, ya’ll invited actual white supremacists to CPAC… end of story.

    • Vipsanius

      get a new insult book

  • kfreed

    And for the remaining 20% of Republicans, introducing the Tea Party alternative to Obamacare/ACA/Exchanges: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/robertson-if-you-tithe-you-wont-have-health-or-financial-problems

    • condew

      “Don’t get sick, and if you do, die quickly” won’t make Pat Robertson rich; but the result is the same.

    • fojap

      Wow, I just read that link and the brutality is mind blowing. He’s essentially telling a sick, elderly couple to give him their money. The next time someone tells me that they don’t believe in any gods but they appreciate Christianity because of charity work, I’ll have to point that one out.

      • feloniousgrammar

        When a grifting institution gets to keep tax free status because they talk about “God” and Jesus, I think we’re allowing criminal activity. During the rise of the Moral Majority in the 80′s a support group called “Fundamentalists Anonymous” was started. A retired woman was living on popcorn and sending almost all of her very limited disposable income to one of the televangelists. This is a predatory and criminal enterprise.

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    Bill Maher made a good point last night (or at least I think it was a current show that I saw last night)….that of that 37% who view Obamacare favorably, a certain percentage of them are liberals who think it doesn’t go far enough and should have been single payer. So lumping those liberals in with the idiots who think it’s soshulism is extremely misleading. Not to mention that when you ask people within that 37% about individual items within the law they seem to love the details of the law. That’s the result of the GOP misinformation campaign.

    As usual, bumper sticker solutions to real world problems are stupid–Stockman-stoopid.

    • CL Nicholson

      Except….many of those liberals are engaged in the same kind of magically think that fuels the Tea Party crew. ACA doesn’t offer single payer and abolish private insurers (uh, except that would mathematically impossible to do without causing a mini recession. But don’t let a little thing like Healthcare economics get in your way).

      One of my uber-liberal hippy friends that she doesn’t support ACA because she can’t opt her kids out of vaccination ( Yes,she’s one of those people. And to think I had a major crush on her as a freshman.)

      So, yeah, I can see many lefties throwing hissie fits for no real reason.

      • Lady Willpower

        We all do stupid shit in college. Most of us grow out of it. The ones who don’t you have to watch out for.

        • CL Nicholson

          True. I only wore flannel and baggy jeans in college and drank coffee until the morning. Fortunately, my wardrobe grew up and I don’t drink coffee all day anymore (just half of it ;-))

          • olcurmudgeon

            wearing clothes besides jeans and a flannel is hardly growing up. but whatever makes you feel special.

            you just cut down every single construction worker with that stupid comment. Id say youre still doing stupid shit. you at least say stupid shit.

          • CL Nicholson

            Yes. Because I stopped dressing like grunge rock/ hip hop hybrid reject from the 90s and updated my wardrobe to dress like a white collar professional (because I am a white collar professional), it means I hate laborers and tradesmen. Funny, I should my machinist father that my shirt and tie means I despise him and the assembly line worker I call “mom”.

            Isn’t there a bridge you should be waiting under so you can harass approaching goats?

      • Chuck McCoy

        Single payer and other options to the left of the ACA could be implemented without causing recession. They would be considerably less expensive and much easier to implement than the ACA clusteryouknowwhat is proving to be. The ACA is better than the devil-take-the-hindmost system it has replaced, but that’s a bit like saying that breaking your leg is better than dying. The bogus “healthcare economics” that we dummies can’t possibly understand seems pretty clear to me. Only capitalistic solutions that provide massive profits for health care providers, pharmaceutical companies, medical device providers, insurance companies and the rest of the rent-seekers count. Clearer, less expensive systems like single payer are rejected not because they will cost too much but rather that they will not produce sufficient profit for those who bring little or nothing in the way of actual health care to the system. Single payer and other progressive health care solutions are used by some of the most vibrant economies in the world. Why would it cause a recession here? Can you help us understand this apparent paradox?

        • feloniousgrammar

          When we have a Congress that will write the bill and pass the law, we’ll have single payer. People who are getting affordable health insurance are getting something of immeasurable value.

          Take the good with the good.

        • CL Nicholson

          Yeah, actually, understanding healthcare economics is significant to understanding why the ACA was seen as good go between where we are now and Single Payer.

          Healthcare is 1/8 of GDP. According to the Single Payer or Nothing Crowd, if you just use Medicare or Medicaid, it will magically work. Except, it doesn’t. You can’t absorb over 10% of the US economy without a plan and means to pay for it, which the ACA provides. Also Medicare would need to be completely revamped (and required significant tax hikes in the beginning) to be fully capable of working in under four years. Its not built to support so many people, and frankly doesn’t have the money for it. Or, as one of my colleagues in the business – its akin to trying to fix the wheels on a moving freight train.

          No one is saying that Single Payer isn’t a better solution, but you need a payment and support infrastructure to manage it, which right now we don’t really have. The payment systems of the EU and Canada took years, and in some cases decades to build. And they have problems of their own, in terms of payment. So-called, Obama Care is a start.

          • Bruno

            ACA is a great first step to single payer. That’s what amendments are for to make improvements & corrections as needed.

          • Treading_Water

            I think the ACA is the first step to single payer like DADT was the first step to full equality. DADT was a pretty terrible law, but miles better than what we had in place before it. There are repairable flaws in Obamacare, but ultimately single payer would be a better replacement. I’d love to see the role of private health care insurance companies reduced. Eventually, I’d like to hope that Americans begin to understand that it’s better to give your healthcare dollars to someone whose profit line isn’t increased by denying coverage.

    • negro domis

      LISTEN KUNT. YOU IRISH STINK TWAT WHORE, BILL MAHER HAS NEVER MADE A GOOD POINT. THAT DOPE SMOKING COCK SUCKING ANTI-AMERICAN FAGGOT NEEDS TO LEAVE THE USA. YOU SHOULD TOO YOU BLEEDING STINKING TWAT IRISH WHORE.

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    ….including ones that suggested dog poop and hemorrhoids are worse better than Congress

    FTFY

    • http://www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go Bob Cesca

      Gah! Fixed. Funniest correction I’ve had to make in a while.

  • Craig Moffitt

    Wow, the trolls are out in force this morning. A new batch of the wingnut welfare checks must have gone out to the paid shills.

    • Lionel Hutz

      Most of the people getting those welfare checks are probably the people VOTING for the welfare checks.

      By the way, a government paycheck = a welfare check. Hate to break it to you.

      • Lady Willpower

        Unless it’s a huge investment firm getting a bailout check, amirite.

      • D_C_Wilson

        So, working a job that happens to be for the government is welfare? What does that make government contractors like KRB and Xie or whatever Blackwater is calling itself this week?

        • Lionel Hutz

          Yes, it is. Because you aren’t paid on supply and demand. You are paid an inflated wage, and in many cases, for a non-needed job created solely as a “job creation program”. Most government jobs are little more than job creation programs. The rest are paid higher than their peers in the private sector.

          Herego – handout.

          • D_C_Wilson

            The rest are paid higher than their peers in the private sector.

            Bullshit. You complain about lies and then drop this big one? Please. I’m sure next you’re going to shriek about closing the national parks and not paying death benefits to soldiers’ families because the people aren’t there to do those “job creation programs.”

            On, and it’s “ergo” not “Herego”.

          • Lionel Hutz

            Suck on the facts my man – http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-30-FedPay.pdf In every category but one, Federal employees have higher comp than those in the private sector

          • D_C_Wilson

            Not among their “peers”. If you compare comparable positions, federal employees make less than their private sector counterparts.

          • ak1287

            Do you know how to read facts, Beavis?

          • Pink No More

            You’re dumber than your avatar.

          • Chuck McCoy

            You’re 100% wrong. Additionally people like you openly disrespecting our teachers, police, fire fighters, librarians, utility workers and other public servants who mostly work for less than similar work in the private sector contribute to an aversion in young people toward pursuing careers in public service. According to you, there is no such thing as paid public service. According to you, the public school teachers are just welfare trash sucking on the public teat. From your comments, perhaps some of yours were.

      • Guest

        You do know that wingnut welfare is not from the government?

  • joseph2004

    The stat I think is interesting in the NBC/WSJ is that Harry Reid and John Boehner are dead even in being hated by Americans. In fact, Ted Cruz isn’t that much more hated than either of them.
    And while Republicans are taking more of a hit than Democrats over the shutdown etc, Democrats are still viewed favorably by only 36% of Americans over the job they’re doing – not a ringing endorsement. So what would Americans want the Democrats to do differently? (I suspect it has something to do with negotiating, or the lack thereof).
    But none of it matters because, as Bob reminds us, it’s all about race anyway, not substance. Americans in the end have gotten more and more simple-minded. One minute they’re voting Democrats into both chambers of congress and electing a socialist-leaning (though convictionless) black Barack Obama, and the next they’re tossing the Democrats out over legislative and fiscal malpractice. And now that the guys and gals they elected to take a serious approach to reducing the size of this ever-more un-accountable federal government are doing exactly that, oh shoot they’re “extremists”! Meanwhile, other extremists would have us believe that shutting down a selective 17% of the federal government for a couple weeks is, as Cesca suggested earlier, pushing us toward “apocalypse.”
    America is sinking fast. Nobody really knows what’s going on, and worse, fewer really care. It’s a bummer, but which party’s fortunes stand to improve most over this trending malaise of national sentiment?
    The Democrats of course! Makes you wonder what Democrats really stand for. Whatever it is, only 36% of America thinks they have it right.

    • fojap

      Do you really believe Obama is a socialist or is that just a rhetorical tactic like when people on the left call someone a fascist? If so, what is your definition of a Socialist? I don’t know any conservatives, so I’m genuinely curious about what they think. Do you consider yourself a conservative?

      • joseph2004

        Yep, I’m a conservative. eeeeeew. Like being a “conservative” is so “strange.”
        You need to get out more. I know lots of Democrats and Liberals (although most aren’t of the extreme variety reflected at this site).
        I think Obama’s background, if one were to be honest about it, puts him clearly in the socialist, or at least, moving-us-toward socialism category. It doesn’t make him Marx or Stalin. But I don’t think his comment about “spreading the wealth around” was a misstatement on his part. His views of government, making speeches about how Americans should embrace it, not be skeptical of it, his obvious (the ACA, for example) belief that bigger government is a virtuous government – all this is something no good conservative would describe the same way. Conservatives are NOT by and large anti-government or anti-taxes. But they are more concerned than most democrats I know about how their tax dollars are spent, and more specifically, when those tax dollars are being squandered or wasted. They are definitely less willing to give elected officials the benefit of the doubt.
        These aren’t sentiments you typically hear from Democrats, and you rarely hear any such thing from Barack Obama. He’s clearly left of center. Whether he’s a “true socialist” is hard to say, but he’s obviously thinks more government is “good” government, I think more than most democrats would want to concede.

        • D_C_Wilson

          If he’s a socialist, why did he adopt a market-based health care plan invented by the Heritage Foundation and formerly promoted by such notorious liberals like Newt Gingrich?

          • Craig Moffitt

            Don’t expect an answer to that D.C. I used to amuse myself by getting RWNJs to agree with me on points lifted directly from Das Kapital. It got boring after awhile, Socialism, Marxism, Communism or whateverism are just terms thrown around by people who have no idea what they are.

          • D_C_Wilson

            I know, just like I also know not to expect “custome” to do anything other than whine about not being able to have a serious discussion even as he continues to do everything he can to avoid having a serious discussion. But if we don’t insist that words still have definitions, then any discourse is meaningless.

          • feloniousgrammar

            In the 1980′s a man in Florida printed up copies og the preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence with no identifying information and handed it out to people on the street to see what people thought of it. Some threw it back in his face and called it “communist.”

            President Obama has brought up teaching civics in the public schools and I’d love to see follow through on that before he leaves office. How can we have a functioning democracy when so many people (left and right) don’t know how our government works? It allows the corporate media to get away with murder.

          • joseph2004

            He “caved.”

          • D_C_Wilson

            Caved in what sense? The socialist position would have been a single payer plan and he didn’t even put that on the table

          • joseph2004

            Yes, he “caved.” Get it?

          • D_C_Wilson

            He caved before he even presented his plan?

        • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

          You obviously don’t know enough liberals and Dems because if you did you’d realize that the President is considered very much a center left candidate and is nowhere near to being a socialist according to the correct definition of that term.

          • joseph2004

            Well, as much as this site has gone out of its way to defend “socialism” in every way, pointing out everything that’s “socialism!” in America, you’d be allowed, I’d think, to believe that if the country went that way, or if Obama did, the progressive left would have absolutely no problem with it.

          • Lady Willpower

            That’s absolutely true. Doesn’t change the fact that this president is NOT Socialist.

          • joseph2004

            My belief is that Obama, if he had his way, would operate in a way that put the Federal Government in much more control over a lot of things that most Americans would find disturbing. As I said, his “spread the wealth around” comment probably describes his preferred approach better than his tenure (with all its roadblocks) as President has. That perception is what much of the right-wing pushback has been about. They don’t want our country to “end up like Greece,” where 30% of the populace works for the government. There are plenty of Democrats who, at least conceptually, would have no problem leaning that way.
            I hate that idea!!!!!!!!!!

          • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

            Aha, there’s your problem. You actually believe that Dems want 30% of the populace to work for the Govt. Where’s your proof? I’ve never met an American Liberal that thought that was okay in my entire life (and I’m no spring chicken).

          • stacib23

            Joseph, you begin your post with the words “my belief”. Anything said after those two words are suspect. Facts, joseph2004, facts. What you believe, feel, suspect is only important to you in relation to what is actually happening and provable. For the rest of us, believing and feeling is just not enough.

          • joseph2004

            That’s bullshit. Give me a break!

          • kfreed

            “Spreading the wealth around” meant that the wealthy should be required to pay a fair share in taxes… particularly as the wealthiest corporations paid zero taxes, not to mention the cashing in on the economic crisis, and then getting bailed out by taxpayers. In other words, give back what you stole from the piggy bank.

          • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

            There are aspects of socialism in almost every government in the world. There are also aspects of capitalism in every government in the world. There is no such thing as a country being a “pure” anything. The “pure” definition of those isms is a teaching device used in textbooks and nothing more. We don’t defend socialism in every way. I defend those socialist aspects of our society that benefit our society. I would fight against socialist aspects of our society that don’t benefit it. And would do the same for/against any “ism” based on that one criteria–what is pragmatically good for the country.

          • joseph2004

            Well said!

          • feloniousgrammar

            Our textbooks suck. It would be helpful if high school classes taught historiography before teaching history, then clearly addressed the histories of political movements, political philosophies, and pedagogy, then put our system in that context.

            I can’t believe that teens don’t want to deal with real controversy. They may, generally speaking, be on the black and white side in their thinking, but most of them are ripe for new perspectives.

        • fojap

          I suffer from depression and am indeed quite lonely. It was not kind of you to phrase it that way, but I supposed you could not have known.

          • joseph2004

            So, you don’t know any liberals, either, I take it?

          • fojap

            That’s quite nasty.

        • kfreed

          Sane people want efficient government, not NO government or government for the 1%

          See, this is where ya’ll misunderstand what people envision when you say “small government” to them. They’re thinking: cut the fraud and waste, gimme a break on my taxes.

          Ya’ll are saying: take their Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions, veterans benefits, student loans, food stamps, public education, wages… 90% of the public is NOT down with that.

          See the difference?

          • joseph2004

            Then I’d say “sane people” does not necessarily include Democrats in congress, or even BO. (Efficient government is the Democrats’ goal?! LOL!!! )

          • kfreed

            Yes. Check your Repube record:)

          • joseph2004

            Oh, they haven’t been much better, I’ll give you that. But ask yourself: Which are more likely to push for “efficient” government? Just your gut feel?
            ‘nuf said.
            Bye

          • kfreed

            I’m not sure we’re on the same page as to the definition of “efficient.”

          • Lady Willpower

            Fine. Let’s start with paring down that nasty, ridiculous Defense budget. Talk about pork!
            Oh, wait. No Republican will EVER touch that. See? Your party is full of shit when it comes to limiting government.

          • feloniousgrammar

            Do you just conveniently forget that when Clinton left office there was a surplus that Bush pissed away by cutting taxes and putting two wars on a credit card?

          • Lady Willpower

            BOTH SIDES BOTH SIDES BOTH SIDES!!!!

            Still sidestepping the issues, I see. The point is that Democrats don’t make any broad claims to limit the size of government; Republicans do, and then promptly fail to cut anything. One would almost think it’s all just a show from the Rs because they abandoned their principles long ago in favor of massive amounts of corporate welfare! And they’re certainly NEVER going to cut the parts of government that live in my uterus or tell me who I can marry, so why even pretend?

        • dbtheonly

          Hey Joseph,

          I’ll agree that most of the posters here tend to be liberal; I’d assert that we’re generally a fairly moderate bunch. Jeff (the Marxist) is a notable & well loved exception; but generally we’re what I’d call moderate.

        • stacib23

          Hell, the wealth was / is already being spread around – just not to those of us outside of corporations, oil and agriculture.

        • McNett

          Conservatives are more concerned about how their tax dollars are spent!! LOL.

          The conservative George W. Bush wiped out Clinton’s surplus two seconds after he was inaugurated. He started two unnecessary, unfunded wars. He expanded Medicare, again without funding, and he gave the Koch brothers and their ilk tax cuts. And then to add insult to injury, Bush’s policies and 30 years of Republican stupidity caused the Great Recession. (Bush created TARP, by the way.)

          Conservatives are adept at lying, fueling racism, and shutting down the government, but other than that, they’re useless.

          The socialist Marxist Kenyan president has reduced the deficit tremendously. He’s appropriated a Republican health care plan, which you hypocrites disavow, and he’s managed to remain dignified while dealing the a Congress full of low-IQ morons like Ted “Smirkface” Cruz and Ted “Looney Bird” Yoho.

          No other group of people or political party could get away with the sniveling lies and dissembling of conservatives.

          • joseph2004

            Yes yes yes… It was all the Republicans’ fault. Democrats never say or do anything stupid. They never do anything for political or selfish reasons. They’re all sugar and spice, right down to their DNA – incapable of hurting or cheating anyone. They’re ethical, moral, tolerant – God knows they’re tolerant. They don’t point fingers – EVER!
            No, I know what you’re saying.

          • kfreed

            Whenever confronted with a grievous injustice committed by Republicans (who try to blame their deliberate misdeeds on Democrats at every opportunity), the answer is always the same. Never is it: “We Should Correct That.” It’s always, “…but the Democrats”… it’s like a subconscious reflex anymore.

            In case you hadn’t noticed, Democrats are harder on each other than they ever were on Republicans… which is why you schmucks get away with the inconceivable. I say: “We Should Correct That.”

          • feloniousgrammar

            Christ on a crispy crust, Joseph! I showed you a picture!

          • Lady Willpower

            “Deficits don’t matter”

          • feloniousgrammar

            Wasn’t Bush wanting to just give the money away, and it was Obama who said that they were going to pay it back? And now the government is making profit off of the payback, as they should, because banks live on interest and should pay money back with interest. Correct me if I’m wrong.

    • Robert Scalzi

      a derp-atrator has entered the room

    • kfreed

      We can poll duel all day long… fact is, people understand who’s responsible for the shutdown – even Republicans. Might it have something to do with the fact that ya’ll have been shouting “Governement Shutdown!” from the rooftops for years now? I guess they didn’t think ya’ll would be dumb enough to actually do it (again).

      “Seventy-eight percent of the country, according to this poll, says the
      country is moving in the wrong direction and pretty much all of them
      blame it on the Republicans. Seriously, there is not one iota of silver
      lining for Republicans in this poll. It’s an utter disaster for them.
      And, yes, Ted Cruz has done something amazing: he’s made Obamacare more popular”

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/10/10/1246159/-Ouch-Republican-approval-tanks-in-new-NBC-WSJ-nbsp-poll

      • joseph2004

        Fine, then elect Democrats (You see where that got Democrats after a couple years controlling the government). They’ll last a few years, be deemed “extreme” for implementing all sorts of laws they mistook as “mandates” from the people, and they’ll get kicked out and we’ll do it all over again.

        • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

          Again, specific examples? We’re a reality based community and prefer to have debate using numbers, facts, etc.

          • joseph2004

            Here in MN (where it’s a balmy 70F today), the Democrats owned the legislature for about 38 years. At least for all practical purposes that was true. The governorship went back and forth. In 2010, for the first time in 38 years, the MN legislature – both houses – was controlled by Republicans. They, like a lot of Republicans around the country, were swept into office with one real mandate – FIX THE FISCAL SHIP!
            Right?
            States everywhere were under water, the governments were “out of control,” and change was needed. The perception was that Democratic spending habits had landed us in hot water.
            In just 2 years, one election cycle, the MN legislature flipped back to Democratic control. Why? Because the idiot Republicans, rather than focus on the real mandate of getting MN fiscally sound again, decided that their election was a mandate to tackle gay marriage and voter ID, both as referenda, and both on the ballot and defeated here in 2012.
            The Democrats with Obama in 2009 and 2010 behaved like kids in a candy store, but were perceived by many and bulls in a china shop. I remember this well because I watched C-Span’s coverage especially of the congress in 2009. Democrats were passing bills with absolutely no Republican votes or input. The country was in recession, states and federal government(s) underwater, and what did the democrats do? Focused on Healthcare, not because it was the major priority of the country at that point but because it was something they’d been dreaming of for decades and they finally had the votes to eek it by, even when the majority of the country said “NO!”
            So, 2010 comes along, states are fiscal disasters – nothing’s really changed – and the Democrats were “shellacked.”
            Now the Republicans are making the same mistakes about “mandates” etc, it’s happening all over again.

          • kfreed

            The reason Democrats were passing bills with “no Republican” votes was because Republicans decided, on the day of Obama’s inauguration, to obstruct any and every measure proposed by the President:

            Robert Draper, author of “Do Not Ask Whatt Good We Do…”

            “TIME just published “The Party of No,” an article adapted from my new book, The New New Deal: The Hidden Story of Change in the Obama Era. It reveals some of my reporting on the Republican plot to obstruct President Obama before he even took office, including secret meetings led by House GOP whip Eric Cantor (in December 2008) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (in early January 2009) in which they laid out their daring (though cynical and political) no-honeymoon strategy of all-out resistance to a popular President-elect during an economic emergency. “If he was for it,” former Ohio Senator George Voinovich explained, “we had to be against it.” The excerpt includes a special bonus nugget of Mitt Romney dissing the Tea Party.”
            http://swampland.time.com/2012/08/23/the-party-of-no-new-details-on-the-gop-plot-to-obstruct-obama/

          • feloniousgrammar

            But Republican mouth-pieces like Limbaugh and others saying without qualifiers that they want this President to “fail”, surely meant something else. Right? I mean it’s not like the POTUS is part of the United States or like he’s an executive or something in one of three branches of government that has enumerated powers.

          • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

            “what did the democrats do? Focused on Healthcare, not because it was the major priority of the country at that point but because it was something they’d been dreaming of for decades”

            Did you know the number one cause of individual bankruptcy is unpaid medical bills? It’s the single greatest financial challenge affecting the average American–whether they have insurance or not. If America’s families are financially insecure and struggling from the consequences of rising healthcare costs and crappy/lack of insurance, fixing it needed to be (and still needs to be a priority). The way to fix a fiscal crisis not always to simply slash away at the budget. Sometimes the proper way is to modify it…which is what ACA did. Since we see that costs are already falling and plans are already cheaper than before, there’s early indicators that we were right all along. I’m happy to provide links to the studies that show prices are lower.

        • kfreed

          Yeah, tell me all about it:

          “MEMO: Health Insurance, Banking, Oil Industries Met With Koch, Chamber, Glenn Beck To Plot 2010 Election”
          http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/

    • http://www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go Bob Cesca

      I didn’t say a damn thing about race.

      The point was to compare the popularity of Obamacare with the unpopularity of the people who are calling for it to be repealed/de-funded/delayed, etc.

      America is sinking fast? No it’s not. Besides, what happened to Exceptionalism?

      • joseph2004

        Oh but c’mon, the race thing has been your drum beat from the beginning. Don’t try and deny it now.

        • kfreed

          Kinda hard to miss when you all invite flesh and blood white supremacists to present at CPAC… notice you’re the one who mentioned race in relation to a post about health care:)

          • D_C_Wilson

            And remember that anti-tax supervillain Grover Norquist was banned from CPAC because he married a Muslim. Nope, no bigotry there.

          • kfreed

            Yep, jihadist Grover Norquist… I remember it well. They just can’t make up their minds, can they? Love him. Hate him. Hate was higher up on the “want” list than abolishig the IRS even… go figure.

        • D_C_Wilson

          Shall we google “racist republican emails” and see what comes up? Then we can talk about who’s been beating the drumbeat of racism.

        • Lady Willpower

          Just because Bob didn’t mention it doesn’t mean I won’t. If you don’t think your party has a race problem, you’re out of your mind. Birtherism is NOTHING BUT racism. “He has a funny name and brown skin! Let’s tell him to go back to Africa!”

        • Pink No More

          I think I’ve had enough of your trolling. Flagged.

  • Lance Hollandsworth

    No we hate Obamacare just as much.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      Again, what specifically do you dislike about it? As it stand your blanket statement only proves Bob’s point.

    • trgahan

      Yeah, I am sure both of you have your reasons, but please keep them to yourselves.

    • kfreed

      “We” who? Republicans? When are you dweebs going to figure out that we can see your comment trail?

      • Lance Hollandsworth

        That’s the point Genius……

        • kfreed

          “jus as much”… Republicans hate Obamacare just a much as Republicans? Not at all redundant.

          • Lance Hollandsworth

            You’re either “High” or one of those out of work Democrats on Unemployment…. or maybe just both?

          • Lady Willpower

            This is why you guys continue to lose. BTW, check out the unemployment and welfare stats for Red states some time.

          • That River Gal

            I love these WWJD moments from the conservative right.

        • kfreed

          “just as much”… Republicans hate Obamacare just as much as Republicans? Kinda redundant don’t ya think? Besides, we’ll be seeing ‘em line up in no time.

  • D_C_Wilson

    That the individual components of Obamacare are very popular even if people say they don’t like Obamacare itself is not a new problem. We’ve known about it for years now. The quesiton is, what can the administration do to break this preception in the face of relentless republican efforts to keep people misinformed by it?

    • joseph2004

      There are some elements that I like. The no-caps provision. The prohibition against denying over pre-conditions. Costs will go up overall because of this, but that’s basic economics.
      But “Obamacare” isn’t limited to just these. It includes provisions that are creating a shift in the workplace – that is, an incentive to convert full-time workers into part-time. It’s all over the news, and it will happen in force leading up to and including the full implementation of that mandate (now delayed a year). Even the big unions are complaining about this big time. On top of that, how many “groups,” organizations, businesses – whatever – have been given a waiver by the administration? That speaks volumes to the flaw-nature of the ACA.
      The law creates new true blue “entitlements” by redefining who the needy are in this country by providing subsidies to what I contend are too many individuals and families who really do not need them. That raises all sorts of questions, not the least “Why would the Democrats do that?” Is it just because so many people really need that kind of help now, or is it a push to create more reliance on government? The “great recession” and it affects notwithstanding, I believe it more the latter. Of course they’re “going to like it!” But do many really “need” it to manage? Obama and the Democrats, under the ACA, have redefined “need” in terms of 400% of the established poverty level.
      So no, not everything about this law is a good thing. A few nice mandates about benefit caps and pre-conditions aren’t enough to justify the incompetence of the rest.

      • D_C_Wilson

        The law creates new true blue “entitlements” by redefining who the needy are in this country by providing subsidies to what I contend are too many individuals and families who really do not need them.

        Could you provide some statistical evidence to support the claim that they really don’t need them?

        Is it just because so many people really need that kind of help now, or is it a push to create more reliance on government? The “great recession” and it affects notwithstanding, I believe it more the latter.

        Again, what do you base this belief on? Anything other than the talking points you heard on Fox?

        As for your comments about unions complaining about the mandate, we’ve already been through this with you before. It’s clear that no matter how many times we explain to you that this isn’t true, you’ll keep repeating.

        BTW, did you know that Walmart is shifting more part time employees to full time now?

        • joseph2004

          I don’t listen to or watch Fox, got it? I’ve made that clear many times.

          You, apparently DO watch it since you seem to know what’s going on over there. (I’d bet half of Fox’s viewer are liberals like you).

          Sorry. I won’t spend all day going back and forth with you on this. When a law extends subsidies to people earning up to 400% of the poverty level, you don’t need statistical analysis to know the Democrats are playing a shell game with the American people.

          Here’s a link that describes a number of union concerns. No, Trumka doesn’t provide any “analysis,” just common sense about things such as the law’s impact (an early concern of many but also ignored by many) on employee work schedules.

          http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/319361-trumka-mistakes-made-in-obamacare

          • D_C_Wilson

            And once again, that article doesn’t prove what you think it does. The unions are asking for their health plans to be qualified for subsidies. They aren’t complaining about the mandate or how it is supposedly forcing more people into part time jobs.

            Trunka is saying that the law needs a few “tweaks”, which surprise, surprise, happens with nearly every major piece of legislation. It’s not a call to repeal it in its entirety.

            BTW, why do trolls who use talking points that were obviously lifted from Fox then deny that they watch it? And yes, a lot of people on the left do monitor Fox. Unlike wingnuts on the right, some people want to know what the opposition is actually saying instead of relying on what other people tell them that they are saying.

          • joseph2004

            Why do you think I monitor this site? It ain’t because I think the views here always agree with my own.
            I never said Trumka and gang were totally against the ACA, just that they’re pushing back now about issues raised by others (those unintended consequences) that were obvious before.
            “Unions are also worried that the law allows employers to not provide healthcare coverage to workers who work less than 30 hours per week. Trumka said companies could cut down on their employees’ work schedules to avoid providing health benefits.”
            Duh. It’s right there in the article.
            I’m done with you. You complain about “trolls,” then you act like one yourself.

          • D_C_Wilson

            Wow. Childish much?

          • kfreed

            “Monitor” this site? LOL. Eeeewwww. That sounds like an important job.

          • joseph2004

            No, it’s just so simple. If one wants to hear or read what’s going on in the “progressive” world, this, among other sites, is a place to go to find that out. It’s why I subscribe(d) to The Nation for a while, Mother Jones for a while.
            You should try it.

          • kfreed

            I already do:) I read a lot of things:)

          • joseph2004

            Have you read Blacklisted by History: The untold story of Senator Joe McCarthy and the fight against America’s enemies ?
            An eye opener.

          • kfreed

            No, but for research purposes I do read the ramblings of the Tea Party’s pet Evangelical pseudo-historian David Barton, wherein Joe McCarthy is now considered an “American hero” by the far/religious right… historical revisionism… so I don’t imagine I’ll rush out and buy that book:)

            “SBOE Conservatives Rewrite American History Books”

            “When the committee took up McCarthyism, for instance, Ames argued that disgraced Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy was actually an American hero. “The SBOE, noting the predictable leftist condemnation of … McCarthy for his anti-communist activity, requested the inclusion of the Venona papers, which revealed that the U.S. government was in fact infiltrated by communists,” Ames later wrote.

            The citizen was channeling his patron, Don McLeroy, the hyperconservative board member who appointed him to the curriculum committee. McLeroy, in six pages of hand-scrawled editing instructions to committee members, parroted Ames on McCarthyism: “Read the latest on McCarthy — He was basically vindicated.” However, in a brief interview last week, McLeroy — who was ousted as the SBOE’s chairman in July, when the Texas Senate refused to confirm his reappointment by Rick Perry — downplayed his interest in clearing McCarthy’s name. ‘He’s not really a hero in my book,” he said. “I just thought he was more accurate about the red threat than people thought. I’m not a historian on this stuff. I’m just a dentist from Bryan.’”
            http://www.texastribune.org/2010/01/12/sboe-conservatives-rewrite-american-history-books/

          • joseph2004

            You should read the book first. It turns out that much of what McCarthy was concerned about was in fact true. But don’t take my word for it! Read the book!

          • kfreed

            It turns out that what you’ve read is far right historical revisionism:)

          • joseph2004

            No, it’s based a lot on the release of KGB and other Soviet records that came out after 1989.

          • kfreed

            NYT: “In the Heart of the Heart of Conspiracy”

            “Part of Evans’s appeal [to conservatives] is his boast to have unmasked the biases and distortions of previous McCarthy critics, this author included. He begins by describing a massive Russian spy operation in the United States, drawing his evidence from K.G.B. files as well as portions of the Venona project, a top-secret operation that traced Soviet intelligence traffic during World War II. Evans leaves the impression that he has uncovered fresh material, suspiciously overlooked until now. In fact, numerous scholars have used these documents to craft a thorough portrait of Communist espionage in Washington, though most believe that the worst of it was over by the late 1940s, when the F.B.I. began a crackdown on spying and a federal security program was put in place. If anything, they say, this evidence serves to reinforce the standard portrait of McCarthy as a bit player in the battle against Communist subversion, a latecomer who turned a vital crusade into a political mud bath.”

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/books/review/Oshinsky-t.html?_r=0

            Sounds a bit like Glenn Greenwald:)

          • D_C_Wilson

            Read Barton? The pseudo-historian whose rather appropriately named book “The Jefferson Lies” was so filed with inaccuracies his conservative publisher pulled it from the shelves out of embarrassment? That Barton? How could anyone learn anything from Barton’s writing except how to make shit up?
            LMAO!

          • joseph2004

            Barton? What’s he got to do with Blacklisted?
            Gotta go.

          • kfreed

            Had you read my comment, you’d know.

          • D_C_Wilson

            My bad. I misread the post and thought you were talking about Barton.

          • fojap

            Here’s the Wikipedia article on the book this guy was talking about:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacklisted_by_History

            From that article:

            “Radosh severely criticises McCarthy’s failure to distinguish between communists and anti-communist liberals, and between those expressing communist views and those working as Soviet agents, and criticises Evans for glossing over this. Radosh concludes:

            ‘Evans’s book falls far short of what it might have done to correct the record about the era. His own exaggerations and
            unwarranted leaps parallel those made by McCarthy. It is unlikely that his hope to change history’s verdict will become a reality as a result of the publication of this book.’”

            And that’s the opinion of a conservative critic.

          • kfreed

            MIght as well… the book he’s referring to is by a Mr. Evans, also of Wingnut Farms:)

          • That River Gal

            I’ll put that on my reading list right after I finish this thing defending the Japanese internment camps by Malkin…god, you guys. Seriously.

          • Robert Scalzi

            Right .. Liar

          • condew

            Conservative is the new radical.

          • kfreed

            We view Fox vicariously via Media Matters:) … like a train wreck you can’t help ogling. I once watched 5 straight hours of it at a relative’s house because I couldn’t believe they were actually billing it as news. Killed a few brain cells doing that… I can only watch in increments now; enough to know that ultimately, that’s where all right-wing talking points are hatched:)

            Common sense isn’t all that common… why we do analysis.

          • joseph2004

            That’s how I feel about MSNBC.

          • kfreed

            Why am I not surprised?

      • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

        “an incentive to convert full-time workers into part-time”

        That’s an unintended consequence and perhaps something that Dems should have thought about ahead of time. HOWEVER, is denying the workers in those income brackets (the ones who need healthcare the most) the answer? No. Is throwing the baby (the entire law) out with the bathwater (this objectionable item) an answer? No. How about a law that says any employer who purposefully and knowingly does this kind of conversion gets punished with a fine or imprisonment. I gotta say, any employer that purposely impoverishes their employees even further than usual by changing them from full-time to part-time out of greed need to be punished….but then again, I’m a liberal.

        • joseph2004

          That’s fine, but the crux of what you are saying is that “people” or businesses or whoever you think are acting badly are themselves to be relied up to “do the right thing.” You can complain all you want about all the injustices of the world (and I’ll agree with you probably 99%), but people are going to take whatever steps they feel they need to improve their bottom line, whether it’s individuals or big corporations. It’s called “gaming the system.”
          Why be surprised that some business see an opportunity to cut costs (some very heavy) by adjusting their hiring practices thanks to Obamacare?
          The ACA, if it was its intention to force employers to cover everyone they employ, should have written that into the law. They didn’t.

          • niharjshah
          • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

            (Disquis ate my last reply here)….

            “people” or businesses or whoever you think are acting badly are themselves to be relied up to “do the right thing.”

            Yes, that’s how the law works in a democratic country. Laws warn us to behave and if we don’t, they specify the potential consequences. Whether we behave or not is up to us.

            “pople are going to take whatever steps they feel they need to improve their bottom line, whether it’s individuals or big corporations. It’s called “gaming the system.”

            This is not a true statement. There are many examples of companies and people who put their employees first and profits second. They are successful primarily because they do put their employees first. It results in happy, loyal and harder working employees. Customers see this and appreciate it….and are more likely to patronize that kind of business. It’s a win/win, which brings up my next observation. Your initial statement implies that people will choose profit over employee well being because they are mutually exclusive. They’re obviously not as I just explained.

            “The Democrats, if it was their intention to force employers to cover everyone they employ, should have written that into the law. They didn’t.”

            This is one of those compromises that the President made in order to get Repub votes for the bill–conservatives and businesses opposed “forcing” anyone. Unfortunate that it was a concession but it did help pass the bill. Now that it is law and we’re seeing some of the negative consequences, lets fix it by fixing the law but not by getting rid of the law. Soooo, we’re back to where we started at…baby, bathwater, etc.

          • joseph2004

            Didn’t the ACA finally pass with zero House Republican votes? The Democrats could have added whatever “they” wanted. Maybe some Democrats have business ties. Oh well that goes without saying.
            Nice talking to you. Have a nice day.
            Gotta run.

          • D_C_Wilson

            Yes, because despite all the concessions that democrats made to the republicans, the republicans stuck to their blood oath to oppose anything that Obama endorsed.

            I love how so many wingnuts thinks the “no republicans voting for the ACA” is a damning indictment on the democrats’ part. As if Obama and the dems are responsible for the GOP’s decision to vote as a block. I suppose democrats are also to blame for the republicans flibustering virtually everything in the Senate?

          • kfreed

            Well, the Republicans got their mandate in… then they voted against it because it had some other useful things in it, like regulation of the industry:)

        • kfreed

          Some businesses will do that, and they’ve mostly been run by conservatives:) Not like they haven’t made that plain enough… because ideologically, they don’t want Obamacare to work. Had they been smart, as concerned about the expense as they are with sticking it to liberals, concerned about their workforce, and the slightest bit forward thinking, they’d have embraced socialized medicine… it would have cost them less in taxes.

      • Barbara Hawley Berka

        We’ve had it in Massachusetts for many years..and it works very well..

    • Robin Johnson

      I think not letting the House delay the implementation is a start because as more people get healthcare and the more jobs that it creates will be a big help. I think that is why they are lying and holding the government hostage because as people get healthcare they can afford and start seeing results in real life of people they know who are sick and need care they will want the government to really fix the health care system.Taking away huge profits from the industry is the real fear not death panels.It’s about money always has been and not the taxpayers money they are worried about. The corporate profits and bonuses that is their only concern.

  • costume

    Jeez, who reads such long pieces? It’s clear within the first couple of sentences where your alliances lie so just cut to the chase and don’t bore everybody with all the other BS. It’s also clear that you’re just preaching to the choir so it’s not like they really need to slog through all of this to know the absolutely, positively, without a doubt agree with you.

    The rest of us, normal people, can’t waste our time.

    • f.avallearce

      THIS is a “long” piece?! You, good sir or ma’am, are a nincompoop who needs to work on their attention span and reading skills. If you are an accurate representative of “normal people,” I cry for the future of this country.

      • costume

        Waaaah! already with the name calling. What’s up with that?

        • TheOne

          Troll

      • kfreed

        He is an accuratte representative of certain people.

        • condew

          Home schooled, no doubt.

    • D_C_Wilson

      Then don’t read it. Or, at least critique it on the merits of the argument he made instead of just whining about how it’s too long for you.

      • costume

        how about this. The writer is pretending to know what others are thinking. The writer is pretending to have powers beyond human capabilities. The writer is asserting things as fact that are actually nothing more than the opinion of the writer.

        You don’t have to disagree with the writer’s conclusion to point out the fallacy of the argument. Jesus Christ, there is no serious political debate anymore. It’s all ridiculous tripe like this.

        • D_C_Wilson

          And you think your whining is raising the quality of serious political debate?

          • costume

            Again with the insults. It’s like some people can’t have a debate without calling names or insulting. This is exactly my point. Thanks for helping me make it.

          • D_C_Wilson

            Gee, your first post is a whine about the piece being too long with not a single remark about any of the points made. Then you attack the writer by calling him a mind reader, but at the same time, you’re crying about personal attacks. If you want to have a debate, then actually debate the content. If you just want to troll, well then, mission accomplished.

          • costume

            God, I already made my point but evidently you didn’t see it. I posted that as a response about 17 minutes ago. It’s great to see all the like minded people who would never ever dare to think independently just having a knee jerk defense of this article. Don’t try to think for yourselves. It’s dangerous I guess.

          • costume

            Wow, I just realize the point I made was in response to you. So you didn’t read or comprehend my response? What kind of place is this?

          • D_C_Wilson

            I’m still waiting for you to actually talk about the content of the article before I could even “knee jerk” defend it. Calling the author a mind-reader isn’t a critique. It’s just a personal attack. You know, the kind of think you’re whining everyone else is doing to you.

          • Barbara Hawley Berka

            Why would you assume it’s a knee jerk defense? We all tend to defend what we believe..I believe he’s spot on…People on the right hate this President because he’s Obama..It would not matter what he did..I’ve observed this …this is not a response to an article..Oh, and yes, people tend to enjoy reading articles that support their observations and conclusions.I have never heard any of the GOP show support of any kind..not in thought or deed to this President..it’s abnormal..

          • TheOne

            You’re not debating or making valid arguments, you are a troll. Congratulations on your new status. Go back under your bridge.

          • Guest

            Keep on trollin’

          • costume

            I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

          • kfreed

            What debate are you having? So far, the only thing you’ve managed to make clear is that you don’t like to read.

        • rayblasdel

          “You don’t have to disagree with the writer’s conclusion to point out the fallacy of the argument.”

          Sorry, but your also saying you don’t have to read piece to disagree with the writer’s conclusions. It’s the same concept of going to a book club to discuss a book when you haven’t even read the book. You want serious debate, yet only read one side of the argument.

          • costume

            When a piece so clearly lays out its premise so clumsily and directly, you don’t need to waste your time with the rest. I’m pretty sure a lot of people scan the first paragraphs of articles and then decide if they’ll give it their full attention.

    • Treading_Water

      And yet, here you are commenting.

      This wasn’t an opinion piece, there were numbers cited throughout the article to refute the conclusion that Stockman tweeted about the ACA. Numbers from the same poll he was citing. Which of those numbers do you have a problem with? Or is it numbers in general? I know math is hard (almost as hard as reading a nearly 900 word article), but looking at numbers to see which is bigger isn’t rocket surgery.

      • costume

        Wow, you’re truly an intellectual. Numbers mean facts right? I’m simply dumbfounded.

        • Lady Willpower

          Numbers don’t “mean” facts. Numbers ARE facts.

          • feloniousgrammar

            La la la can’t hear you, you stink! is not an argument, but why bother trying to explain that. It’s all about their bigotry and Whites are the Jews of Liberal Fascism fee-fees.

        • kfreed

          “dumfounded”… sounds about right. First honest admission from a Republican I’ve heard in ages.

        • gruds

          “cited” means facts

    • kfreed

      That’s what happens when you have the attention span of a flea. You remain ill-informed and then nobody will let you play in their reindeer games.

    • Lady Willpower

      Duuuuuuhhh, reading is hard.

      • kfreed

        … like math… and science.

    • http://www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go Bob Cesca

      “Jeez, who reads such long pieces?”

      You’d benefit from, you know, more reading.

    • Barbara Hawley Berka

      I read every word..and enjoyed hearing someone else speak the truth about the people on the right who despise our President…just because…

  • Badgerite

    These guys can’t even compare favorably in terms of their compassion quotient to Richard Nixon, who was not known for being a cuddly, bleeding heart anything.

  • chris ellis

    One of your best columns. Blind hatred is driving most of the disdain for the ACA.

    • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

      And pure political desperation because republicans are very close to being exposed for years of lies and distortions about the ACA. They also ran two failed Presidential campaigns on those lies and as we all know, the truth is a major foe of the GOP.

      • condew

        Well, when they “create their own reality” it implies they would be divorced form this one. Republicans are trapped in a video game world of their own creation.