A Friend Describes My Philosophy of Change

Why attack Mini and not Dopey Rehburp? Easy answer. (0.00 / 0)

Dopey Rehburp is a sin verguenza, or without shame.  You could spend ten lifetimes trying to shame Dopey into doing the right thing.  So why try?  We CAN shame Mini into doing the right thing. And besides, we VOTED for Mini and not Dopey.  Mini IS our man!  We elected him.  We can unelect him!  Dopey's simply hopeless.  He's Joe the sheepherder, only dumber!

You see, it's kind'a like what Ghandi preached.  Yes, he preached non-violence and passive resistance, but ONLY when the other side had a conscience.  Ghandi realized that, indeed, certain situations called for action, NOT passive resistance and doing nothing. He realized that when the other side was evil, passive resistance would  not work.  And I agree. This is a time for action! Why waste time with Dopey?

I am  of the mind that this snowball has just started  rolling, and it's pickin' up speed daily.  You can sense the anger in the air.  People now DEMAND affordable heatlh care, and they demand it as a RIGHT in our country, not a luxury.  And they demand that their health care should NOT have to be filtered through the for-profit corporate predatory insurance industry.  Someone pointed out that PEOPLE need health care, not corporations.  And all we're saying is that Mini needs to do the right thing and forget the corporations and start representing the people.  He can either jump on board now, or get snowballed REAL good by this juggernaut.  Mark T. is exactly right on this one.  Mini should do NOTHING at all instead of creating bad policy.  Remember Hippocrates.  First do no harm. No MORE harm that is.  Mini needs to listen to what ol' Hippo was saying.  And we're gonna shame him until he does!  Mini HAS a conscience, or at least he USED to!

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Tue Jun 02, 2009 at 20:44:25 PM UTC

shame Max into action? (0.00 / 0)

No Larry, you cannot shame Max into doing anything, and you can't elect anybody else as a Democrat because the Democrats in Montana do not have the spine to get rid of their DINO's.

Nationally, about 50% of the Dems thought they had the spine for it when they tried to oust Joe Lieberman.

Max knows this.

And he also keenly remembers the millions of dollars funnelled into his campaigns by the medical, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries.

Shame vs. $$$$$

Let's see what wins out.

---

by: Eric Coobs @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 16:41:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Point well-taken, Eric. (0.00 / 0)

Of course you're right in your analysis, Eric.  But this is a new day.  Things are NOT like they USED to be.  You see, today we have the internet.  And Max could be a casualty because of it.  No longer must we rely on word of mouth and the corporate newspapers to hear what Mini's up to.  And the biggest factor of all is that NOW we can guage the REAL level of discontent out there.  And I'd say it's signicant.  So, while your points are correct, I still believe that there is a new variable in the equation.  Well actually, LOTS of new variables.  I think all bets are now off.  I've seen stranger things happen.  I SAW that look on Mini's face as he sat next to O'Bama.  Mini's worried.  And well he should be. He looked like he was whizzin' down both legs!  Again, while Mini  and company are busy rebuilding Iraq, the folks on the homefront are gettin' REAL pissed!

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 16:55:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

rehberg and the republicans are completely irrelevant to this issue... (0.00 / 0)

they don't have enough votes to do anything and they know that they are completely 180 degrees wrong on health care yet they insist on flailing about. and using jake eaton tells me one thing that is glaringly obvious:
they know they cannot win on this and the only idiot dumb enough or desperate enough for a job this hopelessly against the will of the people was mr eaton. i am sure if they could have hired someone better they would have.

even the republicans know that the great mass of people are angry as hell at their health insurers. why take a stance that supports private health insurers in this climate? ideological intransigence in the face of extreme odds equals extreme stupidity....which is ok by me. one less enemy to worry about. i am willing to see what happens tomorrow with the single payer meeting before i judge baucus any further. until then, will hold my fire.  

United we stand, divided we fall.

power to the polite people!

---

by: wolverine6 @ Tue Jun 02, 2009 at 21:32:43 PM UTC

The latest statistic is............. (0.00 / 0)

that now, a full SIXTY-TWO PERCENT of bankruptcies in this country are a result of medical situations!  SIXTY-TWO PERCENT!  So, what does that mean?  It means that you work your ASS off your entire life playing by the rules, ONLY to be wiped out at some point because Mini Barfus is a friggin' WIMP!  Come on, guys.  There is probably NO one single thing more important to the economy than allowing people to not be destroyed by a sh*tty health care system!  Hells bells, if every OTHER freakin' civilized country in the world can take care of the health needs of its citizens, why can't America?  We're number ONE, remember?  Number one in moron politicos like Mini Barfus!

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 13:56:56 PM UTC

we are getting to baucus (0.00 / 0)

because the other democratic congress people up for election in 2010 are getting nervous about max's bumbling on health care reform costing them votes....they are contacting the white house and obama is reacting.

the middle class and the working class are getting up off the bar stools and the lazy boy recliners and switching off the baseball games to call, write letters and show up at rallies. this has the democrats scared shitless...

usually the middle class and working class are fairly complacent about politics. we pay taxes. go to work. pop open a PBR and flip on the baseball game with the remote in the left hand and flip up the recliner with the right hand and try to unwind....

but this business of bailing out every big banker and investment firm on wall street on our dime with nothing left for decent health care just really enrages the ordinary citizen in this country.

they are scared and they should be...

United we stand, divided we fall.

power to the polite people!

---

by: wolverine6 @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 15:49:35 PM UTC

where's the single-payer advocate running against rehberg? (0.00 / 0)

want to prove its viability as a political issue? do it by using it to get votes.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 16:11:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't be so disingenuous, Matt (0.00 / 0)

You know that single issue political campaigns are disasters-in-waiting.

Running on a strictly single payer platform would do nothing but garner huge corporate contributions to your opponent, and lots of media campaigns against you. As a political base, people without access to health care are a powerless lot. And for those with health insurance? Most just want to see their costs lowered, and see single payer as one avenue among many to do that.

Take two candidates: one with a single issue, single payer ideology; and another with a more moderate, though well rounded portfolio of policy positions. For which would the average insured, though cost conscious health consumer vote? Not the strident single issue voice. You know that.

Good politicians (read Sanders, Kucinich, etc.) know how to run multi faceted campaigns that put health care reform into a proper context. And they understand the political opposition. Single payer support gets couched in very delicate terms so as to avoid the inevitable corporate and ideological blowback and get elected.

What are you trying to gain by resorting to the fallacy of the sacrificial lamb theory of political feasibility? Surely there is a viable candidate in Montana who could take Denny on who supports single payer. Or have dems really become so weak-kneed that they can't even vocalize a nuanced position that a majority of their constituents support? That they wither at the first sight of a lobbyist, a PAC and a smear campaign?

If politics has become so devoid of principle that ideology and crony capitalism rule, then, well, there is no need for politics anymore, and it is time to renew the system.

---

by: JC @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 19:18:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Far more practical anyway would be running a single payer initiative requireing the (0.00 / 0)

state to set up a single payer health insurance pool funded by state taxes and outlawing the sale or use of private health insurance as detrimental to the public good.

We could say, No more renewals, no new transaction of private health insurance. So the date people's premiums come due is the date they are enrolled in our statewide pool.

For instance. And I'm sure it could be perfected better than my off the cuff suggestion here.

The one problem would be the state getting access to Medicare, Medicade, and Chip funds to be put into the pool.

Initiatives are required by state law to be one issue.

As I recall corporations were prohibited from contributing to state wide initiatives. Or was that overturned?

---

by: Steve W. @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 20:45:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I disagree. (0.00 / 0)

Why?  Easy answer.  I-137.  After one hundred years of absolute corporate rule in Montana, Montanans finally for once told the mining industry "no"!  This was a monumental vote.  You  see, if the abuses are great enough, no amount of money can disguise the obvious. The people will eventually get angry enough to vote out the perps.  And that's where I think we are now.  It's a long process of educating the voters, but it's already started.  Once people figure out exactly what single payer is, Dopey Rehburp is very, very beatable.  A good single issue candidate does INDEED have a great chance.  Look what Schweitzer did to sen. cornhole burns!  He nearly got him by taking trips to Canada.  It's doable.

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 20:50:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

As I recall corporate money was barred from the I-137 vote. But (0.00 / 0)

corporate money can be used in campaigns for federal Office.

Also, electoral campaigns are quite different from initiative/issue campaigns.

i think Rehberg could be beat with a good candidate who actually drew a contrast between themselves and Rehberg. But it would require more than a single issue. And it would probably require a significant degree of self funding at least early on to establish themselves as viable.

---

by: Steve W. @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 21:03:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, you're wrong. (0.00 / 0)

Corporate money was not barred. They whined about that, but they lied.  And industry outspent the opponents by a huge margin.  Electoral campaigns are not that much different.  Example.  Schweitzer, a complete unknown, nearly took Burns.  He fell short by barely four thousand votes.  And I DEFY you to name five people who had ever heard of Schweitzer before he ran.  He was a complete unknown who tapped  into the anger over high priced drugs.  Remember his trips  to Canada?  A good candidate  with Schweitzer-like qualities could indeed kick Dopey's ass.  Again, not to belabor the point, Steve, but  Montanans are an upredictable, independent lot.  Get'em angry enough and they'll vote the bums out.  Remember how Burns got in!  People were mad at Melcher for the wilderness stuff.  Never underestimate the independent nature of the Montana voter.  As I've mentioned, I think Montanans are angry enough now to vote for someone who offers real solutions.  I may be wrong, but if you peruse my posts of many years, you'll see I've been very right on gauging sentiment.  I was the first on this forum to state to endorse O'Bama and say that he did indeed have a chance.

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 21:17:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm trying to get an answer on whether ...ok here it is. (0.00 / 0)

Corporate contributions to initiatives were outlawed by initiative 125, but then later over turned. And they tried to overturn the ban on heap leach after they got 125 tossed.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.or...

Legal background:
In First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Massachusetts law that prohibited corporate spending to influence the outcome of a state ballot initiative (on First Amendment grounds). Though much of the opinion resorted to "listeners' rights" arguments that protect the speech, not the (corporate) "speaker," the effect was to create a presumed corporate "right" to influence initiatives and referenda. Justice Rehnquist's sharp dissent is notable.

In Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) the Court held that there was no First Amendment violation in requiring a corporation to set up segregated funds (a PAC) for spending on candidate campaigns. This meant that while corporate executives and employees could contribute to a PAC affiliated with the corporation, the corporation could not write company checks directly to a candidate's campaign.

Following that ruling's logic, in 1996 Montana citizens drafted and passed Initiative 125, which banned direct corporate contributions to initiative campaigns. The law was challenged by the Montana Chamber of Commerce and others as unconstitutional. Deciding Bellotti, rather than Austin was the guiding precedent, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals took Bellotti even further in striking down I-125 (Montana Chamber of Commerce, et. al. v. Argenbright, 2000).

Since Bellotti, however, a series of Supreme Court decisions (links below) have indicated increased deference to campaign contribution limits, leading some scholars to believe that a reversal of Bellotti may occur.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.or...

---

by: Steve W. @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 21:57:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again, one more time. (0.00 / 0)

Steve, not that it's relevant to this discussion, but the mining industry ITSELF decided place limits on its spending to defeat I-137. They were not legal constrained to do so. True story.  Even so, they outspent the proponents by  an astronomical amount.  Check it out with MEIC.  I don't have time to rehash it.  My point was/is, that after a HUNDRED FRIGGIN' YEARS of Anaconda/MPC complete control of Montana politics, the people of Montana finally  said "NO" to the minind industry!  Now, if you don't/can't understand the significance of that, you don't understand Montana history.

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 23:00:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i would welcome it matt. (0.00 / 0)

but the efficacy of single payer for electing politicians who support it does not have the same blow-back wattage directed toward  the politician who stands in the way of it...

still say denying single payer it's day in court is dangerous political strategy with the middle and working class....you see i am guessing that the one reason that obama and baucus are sticking to their private insurers is because they fear proposing too big a change will cause a backlash among the people who are content with their current health care coverage which would make them susceptible to republicans argument of big brother coming ect and other bogus fear tactics.....

but the people who advise baucus are so insulated from the real working and middle classes that they just do not realize how angry people are out here about our health insurance. Baucus's staff was shocked at the response to the listening meetings. if they were doing their jobs right in the first place they would not have been shocked. they would have already advised max to include single payer from the beginning because even my aunt gilda and uncle bud are hating on their health care insurers. in fact i would be hard pressed to find anyone who trusts their health plan...what do those staff people do for a living anyway? shocked? what do you mean you were shocked? get out in montana once in awhile and talk to some people fercrissakes. don't any of the staffers have relatives?

failure to provide an easy to use, affordable and dependable health care system  has serious blow-back potential with the middle class and baucus is blind to it.in fact, if it is not handled very carefully it could provide a breath of life to the republicans that you, me and whole lot of hard workers worked our tails off to see defeated. they are hanging by a thread and they have no credibility anymore but this stupidity of failing to see what 3/5ths of americans really want in health care could be the infielder's error combined with an overthrow at first base  that gives them new life. i hope not. 30 years of total idiocy was enough for this gulo luscus.

United we stand, divided we fall.

power to the polite people!

---

by: wolverine6 @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 22:27:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right you ARE, Wolvereeny! (0.00 / 0)

Mini Barfus is busy rebuilding Iraq AND his insurance industry pals, but not a friggin' DIME to the American people!  Mini is into health issues though.  He's a regular orthopedic doc.  He simply throws a bone now and then to Montanans, like the Rocky Mountain Front deal.  Well sir, THAT AIN'T ENOUGH NO MO!  Time to declare war on Mini! As the notorious Mark T. always points out, we don't WANT no bullsh*t bill!  It's single payer or nuthin' at all!  Mini's got it.  WHY CAN'T WE?

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 16:13:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

FEHBP, which ensures federal employees, including members of Congress (0.00 / 0)

is not single payer. It is a set of private insurance options and some union-backed plans.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 16:40:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well of COURSE it is. (0.00 / 0)

All's I'm saying is is that if Mini were a REAL leader, he'd do without until such a time as the FIFTY SOME MILLION uninsured fellow Americans had insurance too!  That's all.  The point being, Matt, is let's see if Teddy Kennedy has to file for bankruptcy as a result of HIS recent medical condition!  Again, sixty-two percent of bankruptcies are a result of medical emergencies!  Don't  like that figure?  Here, try this one.  That translates into SIX THOUSAND bankruptcies daily.  That's a helluva hit on our economy.  Figure that out annually and it's a helluva blow to the working families of America.  Now, all's  I'm saying if Mini can stomache a TRILLION DOLLARS for the Chimp's Iraq war, he outta have the stomache to help his fellow countryman!  Mini is kinda like sen. alfred e. newman.  What, me worry?  No, he doesn't.  He's GOT great insurance! He's NOT one diagnosis away from disaster!  He works for us, NOT the insurance industry.  And now, with the internet, he can run, but he can't hide.  I think he's figuring that out.

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 18:11:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

single payer it ain't but... (0.00 / 0)

here's a little good news....http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/5631

United we stand, divided we fall.

power to the polite people!

---

by: wolverine6 @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 00:55:42 AM UTC

that's specific at least (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Steve W. @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 01:40:51 AM UTC