Health-Care Activists Targeting Democrats

[undeterred]

Source: The Washington Post

In the high-stakes battle over health care, a growing cadre of liberal activists is aiming its sharpest firepower against Democratic senators who they accuse of being insufficiently committed to the cause.

The attacks -- ranging from tart news releases to full-fledged advertising campaigns -- have elicited rebuttals from lawmakers and sparked a debate inside the party over the best strategy for achieving President Obama's top priority of a comprehensive health-system overhaul.

The rising tensions between Democratic legislators and constituencies that would typically be their natural allies underscore the high hurdles for Obama as he tries to hold together a diverse, fragile coalition. Activists say they are simply pressing for quick delivery of "true health reform," but the intraparty rift runs the risk of alienating centrist Democrats who will be needed to pass a bill.

In recent days -- and during this week's congressional recess -- left-leaning bloggers and grass-roots organizations such as MoveOn.org, Health Care for America Now and the Service Employees International Union have singled out Democratic Sens. Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) for the criticism more often reserved for opposition party members.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

---

Wake up Democrats! You were voted into office to fix this, not to make the Health Care giants comfortable.

[pleah]

1. It is about time.

K&R

[Vincardog]

68. Damned right lets target the "centrist Democrats" If they want to govern like rePUKES let them run l

[GreenTea]

75. ABSOLUTELY -well said..."it's about time"! it's also about time Democrats stood up for the people

who put them in office and pay their salaries and PAY for their health care.

Instead of some Democrats listening to the, only seven (7) insurance corporations (and republicans) dictating to paid off Dems NOT to support a public option....

We will, and we are seeing very clearly which Democrats are paid off by these same insurance corporations and which are for the people and tax payers.

Because everyone know including the insurance corporations and the republicans (but their greed will fight it)-

THAT WE NEED UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR ALL NOW! ONLY WITH A PUBLIC OPTION PERFEBLY SINGLE PAYER!!!

[depakid]

2. The more the better

better still if a few of these corrupt Senators lost their bids for re-election.

Might just put the fear of God into the rest of 'em.

[patrice]

3. Where do I give money? nt

[undeterred]

10. Move On is running ad campaigns

and I'm sure they will need money to keep it up: http://pol.moveon.org/healthcare/ads /
(There is a link to donate at the top of the page.)

[No Elephants]

56. Health Care for America Now is a coalition of groups working for

public health care. AFL-CIOsupports it, among others. Read about it here


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/06/19/health-care-co... /


and here.


http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/06/02/coalition-set-to-figh... /


I noticed another poster mentioned moveon.org. They are working for a public version, too. If you go that route, make sure your donation does not go into a general fund, with which moveon can do anything its wants, but specifically to the fight for public health care.



Happy donating.

[mascarax]

4. Here's links to 9 Senators (D)

Bill Press has links to 9 Democratic Senators who have not agreed to support a public option.

www.billpress.com

You can call/write them too...while we all may not live in their states to vote, we can certainly let them know we'll support ($$$) their primary opponents.

(Oh, and a plus: they're allegedly mad he did this because of all of the phone calls)

[Suji to Seoul]

21. Oh, boo-fucking-hoo. I lived in a country with socialized medicine.

IT was the best, most efficient medical care I ever had.

[Doremus]

22. I just sent an email to every one, except Wyden. He only wants to hear from people in his state.

That's okay. His Dem primary opponent will be hearing from me via my Paypal account if Wyden doesn't support a strong public option.

Edited to add: thanks for posting the link!

[xxqqqzme]

30. This attitude really pisses me off.

He ONLY wants to hear from people in his state - Great, then his vote won't affect the rest of the country?


IF he vote only affected his constituents, then that would be fine. He knows those DCCC & DSCC letters go out to all 50 states?

These wimp ass democrats really get my blood pressure rising.

[imdjh]

66. Barney Frank does the same thing. nt

[primavera]

92. You and me both

Especially when you consider that these guys will take private meetings with industry lobbyists who are most assuredly not among their constituents.

[imdjh]

65. Doesn't that piss you off? They vote on things affecting us all, but they only want local mail.

Barney Frank does the same thing.

[primavera]

93. Very much so, yes. - n/t

[Go2Peace]

70. I am from Oregon. Wyden is not representing his constituents.

There is no excuse for his arrogance. He is in a liberal state and ignoring the will of his constituents. This is not simply about health care.
I have been a supporter, but this is turning me. If he cannot support us with this then I will be working to get him out of office and replaced with someone who listens and votes with the will of the people in his state.

[bobbolink]

73. Have anyof his constituents done a search for the money? It always makes sense to follow the money!

How 'bout a campaign to raise money for billboards, full or half-page ads?

Apply some pressure!

[lame54]

80. I added my name and donated for this add

http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5649/t/4612/content.j...

[bobbolink]

85. Very good! Thanks for showing this. Has it been posted on DU by itself?

I'm very much for single-payer, myself, but I applaud the effort to get attention in this way!

[mopinko]

82. wtf is wrong with wyden? i though he was one of the good guys.

follow the money, i suppose.

[disndat]

53. An incomplete list.

Bill Press left out Alan Spector and Dianne Feinstein. I wonder why. The big surprise of Wyden, one of the most liberal of all Senators. Getting rid of the ignominious 11 should be a slam-dunk, although DiFi has another 4 years to go.

[quidam56]

5. We must have health care reform NOW

After seeing what is called quality health care in Tennessee and Virginia, clearly profit care is more important than patient care. http://www.wisecountyissues.com/?p=62 I support public option.

[nightrain]

6. thing is... public option does nothing to remove private health

insurance corporations.

Only single payer does that.

[MisterK]

8. agree

Cut out that middle man insurance company who is sucking the life out of HC.

[creeksneakers2]

9. The public option will compete with insurance companies

They are terrified of it.

[nightrain]

14. more than likely the public option will end up with a pool of the

sickest and most needy of services, rather than a larger pool of ALL Americans. A smaller and sicker pool of peope costs more and probably means extent of covered services will diminish. Look at MA and TN.

The public plan is a compromise attempt to get bipartisanship. Bad move.

See debate at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C94pd-848g&feature=chan...

Yeah, the insurance corporations don't want the public option, but you know they're going to get their way, don't you??

[stevenleser]

17. I disagree with your characterization even as I see that you are constructing your argument very

logically.

The only way that the insurance market or exchange works properly is if there are very specific and plentiful guidelines and benchmarks, benchmarks being the most important in my opinion.

For example, you should have benchmarks that measure the treatment effectiveness (ability to heal a given health issue) and efficiency (how much it cost) for each health issue and by severity. So even in the case that the sickest tended to go for a public option, fine. If you measure the the average effectiveness and efficiency of treatment of cases that presented similarly, then you have no problem. Then the plans will be compared properly over time in terms of which ones are doing a better job for the money.

I doubt that I am the only one who realizes this.

Furthermore, the plans are all supposed to include true healthiness care where everyone will be provided the best in preventative medicine and guidance. That should lower the amount of people who end up sicker and more needy over time.

[PSPS]

31. No, it's not "benchmarks." Insurance works by pooling risk.

Your description sounds kind of like either rationing or determining whether or not curing a person is "worth it" financially.

No, the way insurance is supposed to work is through "pooled risk." The larger the pool the better. That's why a national single-payer system works the best, as evidenced by every other country in the world that has it.

Co-ops, "public option" (as described so far) and other canards being floated by the private insurance stooges who masquerade as legislators are designed specifically to limit their pool and, hence, doom them to failure. The private insurance criminals will spend anything and everything they have to buy off the government because, otherwise, they'll be out of business. They have nothing to lose. And those yachts, multiple mansions, billion dollar CEO payouts and the like, are only going to be wrenched from their cold dead hands.

[stevenleser]

45. OK, you dont get it. That's fine n/t

[No Elephants]

58. PSPS is on the money (no pun intended).

[stevenleser]

88. To whatever they think they are responding they might be, not to what I wrote n/t

[nightrain]

40. healthcare doesn't work by "benchmarks". This whole idea

about "treatment effectiveness"/"best practices" is actually kind of silly. Within a certain range that can work, but then we get to the individual, with all our idiosyncracies and inconsistencies. We humans are messy and do not conform easily to "one way is the best way". That's far too simplistic of an approach.

Are you a healthcare practitioner? "Average effectiveness and efficiency"--nice theory, very impractical in practice.

Watch the several part video debate between single payer proponent MD and the public option proponent at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C94pd-848g&feature=chan...

[stevenleser]

46. As with the other responder, you completely miss what I am saying. n/t

[nightrain]

54. well then, restate it. And/or pay attention to what we are saying...

[stevenleser]

89. No, I am not the one who is responding to something other than what was said

I am simply stating that if we have an insurance market with multiple plans, there needs to be benchmarks so people and governmental bodies have a meaningful way to evaluate their effectiveness. That has nothing to do with rationing or pooled risk or anything else either of the two responders said.

If you have any experience with benchmarking business processes you will get what I am talking about. If not, you won't, and any response will be as useless as the two I got previously.

Health care plans are benchmarked and rated all the time. This is how we know France's health care system is rated #1. Someone or some group spent the time to look at pieces of the plans of various countries and compared them and came up with a rating system.
That is a kind of benchmarking called performance benchmarking. That rating did not include costs but there isnt any reason why it couldn't in the future.

The reason this is needed even more acutely with a public option being in the mix with private insurers is to counter false arguments that it is providing care less efficiently and effectively or if the argument is made and it is not false, someone can then step in and try to fix it. It is also critical with a public option for the very reason someone else stated regarding the risk that the sickest and poorest may flock to the public option.

If the systems are properly benchmarked then it doesnt matter if the sickest and poorest tend to go to one plan. As long as we see that:

Private Plan A saw 10000 patients with an acute case of Y disease and spent an average of $5000 per patient and 10% of patients died

Private Plan B saw 8000 patients with an acute case of Y disease and spent an average of $4500 per patient and 12% of patients died.

The Public plan saw 2,000,000 patients with an acute case of Y disease and spent an average of $5000 per patient and 8% of patients died.

or Public plan saw 2,000,000 patients with an acute case of Y disease and spent an average of $8000 per patient and 2% of patients died.

Those are the kinds of benchmarks I am talking about and I have even simplified them a bit. Age and prior healthcare and other factors could be added. The point is that the overall costs of the plans (and thus things like the concept of pooled risk) are irrelevant because we are looking at average costs and average success rates of people who present similarly. We need to know which plans are effectively and efficiently handling health issues. Obviously if in the above case we had the Public plan seeing 2,000,000 patients with an acute case of Y disease and they were spending $15,000 per patient and 20% were dying, we would know there is a high likelihood that we have a problem and someone needs to check it out.

This is the answer to Diane Feinstine's question about cost of a public plan. You put into place a strong system of benchmarks to see what you are getting.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

19. yes, and Ins Cos will dump all the expensive cases so Public seems too costly to taxpayers

yep.

Ours would be the only country subsizing for profit corporations that block access to health care.

[nightrain]

63. yep, just wait and see.... sad....

[ProudDad]

25. Unless the privates are outlawed from

denying insurance to ANYONE...

------------------------------

The privates would be put out of business if they have to actually compete...Obama said so...

[annabanana]

34. +1. . (rec this post). . n/t

[fasttense]

36. I'm not sure that a public option will end up with Just the sickest.

There are millions of young college students and grads who right now do not have health insurance because they can't afford it. They are a good pool of people to have included. Especially if the public option cost very little.

My son and daughter are 2 examples. In their early twenties, graduated and soon to be graduated, they can't afford health care and their barely above minimum wage jobs do not offer health care. They are very healthy (thank God) and seldom need to see a doctor. They would be perfect patients for a public option health care program at a very low cost.

[rucky]

39. I'm healthy and employed and would switch to the public option....

just so I won't keep getting rejected on claims - such as routine visits and that ambulance trip I had to take.

[stevenleser]

90. me too. Just on principle alone

[CTyankee]

47. Are you implying that a public option would charge less for young, healthy people?

If so, then that implies that older, sicker people would pay more? Isn't that what we're trying to fix here?

[AllyCat]

60. Well, here is one healthy family of four that will drop my employer-subsidized plan

and join the sickest public group. I know many who will do the same

[No Elephants]

59. Not as terrified as people would like to have us believe and not anywhere near as terrfied as they

are of public health care.

If it's only an option, they will figure out a way to confuse and screwn the public. They've been advertising for a while already.

[GinaMaria]

74. yes they are

Many claim if a public option is passed they will have to close their doors because they will not be able to compete. A public Option is a path to single payer, not the most direct but it gets us there.

[bertman]

18. I'm a huge Single Payer advocate but there is no way in the world that it's going to go

through now.

The contributions and lobbying from the Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharma are certainly a large part of it. But the other, seldom-discussed part is the devastating effect a quick transition to Single Payer would have on our economy. The Health Insurance Industry, for all of its bloated evils, employs LOTS of Americans who pay taxes and support local community economies.

Where would the working class of Health Insurance employees go for employment? We know that the majority of them would not immediately be employed by the government. Some maybe, but not that many.

I know that none of us, myself included, give even half a shit what happens to the executives who have been hauling in the big bucks. But we all should care that people who work hard and need jobs to support their families will be victims here too.

I would feel a lot better if I thought that the Congress was working on a way to make a smooth transition from the current fiasco to Public Option and then to Single Payer, but right now it seems like it's become an attempt by our political class to protect the status quo.

[AlphaCentauri]

20. what about if the government buys some of the health care companies

no job losses, the infrastructure is there just change the administration and the health plans.
If the government had enough money to bailout the auto, banks and insurance agencies it can get the money to buy a couple big health insurers and it would be cheaper than building from scratch.

[bertman]

26. Interesting idea. I have not given that any thought, but I will now. My guess is that they

would ask for so much money for them that it would be like the most recent bailout--into the trillions. And that would be a deal breaker.

[ProudDad]

27. Exactly

Their stock is so over-"valued" ("shareholder equity" -- read rich FUCKS) and their ranks are so over-filled with unnecessary managers, claims deniers, fault finders, pre-existing condition detectives, doctor spies, advertising managers, bribers and thieves, corporate jet jockeys and chauffeurs, resort trip bookers and other assorted trash...

Not to mention CEOs who ain't worth the crap that clings to their undershorts...

The small percentage of people who do the real work of delivering HEALTH CARE to human beings should be hired by the new Single Payer system to continue to deliver Health Care.

The rest should be sent to find new jobs in this brave new post-corporate-capitalist world.

[Beartracks]

32. So... much.... waste...

"unnecessary managers, claims deniers, fault finders, pre-existing condition detectives, doctor spies, advertising managers"

True, when your business is about reducing risk you have to employ a LOT of people and spend a LOT of money to determine WHO and WHAT is covered. That's where a veritable shitload of money goes in America's health care system.

That's why single-payer would be so much cheaper and efficient: we (the nation and its citizens) wouldn't be wasting all those billions of dollars since EVERYBODY is covered, and ALL medically necessary procedures (as determined by YOUR OWN DOCTORS) are covered. Savings will be realized from NOT having that black hole sucking money away from health care, NOT putting money into lobbyists' pockets, AND also because preventive, PROactive care for all will turn into less catastrophic, REactive care overall.

But that's just my 2 cents.

[Canuckistanian]

76. You got it

Right on all counts. As a Canadian, I look at the American system and marvel at the complex arguments for keeping insurance companies.

It's very simple. Free the doctors to make the best MEDICAL decisions necessary for good outcomes and GET RID of the the waste, roadblocks and outright fraud the the insurance companies represent.

It's really a win-win situation.

[bertman]

51. "Not to mention CEOs who ain't worth the crap that clings to their undershorts..."

Priceless.

That's a DUZY if I ever saw one.

[ProudDad]

72. Why, thanks...

I've been an IT fly on the wall in the boardrooms of corporate USAmerica...

I know how uniformly uncreative, dull and programmed these dangerous korporate klowns called "CEOs" really are...

[AlphaCentauri]

71. The government may dissect some of the waste assets they own

just not buying their plains, their luxury penthouses that will take the prices down

[MisterK]

7. Atta boy !

Where can I get in?

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Wyden is a tool in any case

and replacing him with a public minded actual Democrat would be a joy.

[depakid]

12. I would love to see DeFazio take him out

Probably won't happen- but if he ends up blocking a public option, my bet is that there WILL be a primary challenge. One that Wyden may well lose.

[Oldenuff]

15. Well...we got rid of Smith

and that was a REAL step in the right direction.(I didn't like his anti-cannabis stance anyway...and Wyden is no better in that regard)

I would wholeheartedly support a challenger to Wyden.He has gotten far too comfortable,and perhaps he is beginning to think he is untouchable.

[NJCher]

13. thanks for the info

I have friends and family members in Nelson's district. I'll make sure they all write letters, even if I have to ghost write them.

[Better Believe It]

16. Good! We need 51 votes, with or without reconciliation, to pass a strong public option

[eridani]

23. The only thing to do. The Repubs will be against anything n/t

[farmboxer]

24. I feel that some have betrayed "We the People".

I want health care now, like Europe and like our Congressperson's. Why do they believe that "WE THE PEOPLE" do not deserve health care, but they do?! America is ranked #37-38 in world. Ask those crooks about that! They need to give up their health care if they do not want us to have it. They can also give up our votes as well. I really feel betrayed. They are betraying us to give their friends the insurance companies/drug companies more money for our blood and deaths. We will die in the streets a horrible death. If the CEO's win, this will be our future, of course, the politicians will be celebrating in five star resorts with our money.

[Dragonfli]

28. Those so called "democrats" are bringing it on themselves

The part that angers me the most is that even if they are voted out eventually for their betrayal of those they represent, they don't care.

They will all have cushy jobs wating for them working as lobbyists for those that are bribing them now.
They are looking at a substantial pay raise and exciting change of career for taking bribes.
A reward for the guilty... only in America!!

[PuraVidaDreamin]

33. as well as a comfortable health insurance plan for life.

It's all disgusting.

[bjobotts]

29. Instead of worrying about voters you might lose concentrate on those new voters you will win by bold

by boldness. Do what you know is right and watch all the new voters you gain.

[Pharlo]

35. Maybe these health care advocates need to

look into the possibility of starting a 'Anti-Health Care Democrats Primary Challenger' Fund.

They wouldn't need to know the names of the challenger, or even if one exists at this time. Just let it be known that the fund is there to subsidize a pro-health care primary candidate against any 'Democrat' willing to sell out average Americans to the Insurance Industry.

Just an idea. God knows, even though I'm currently unemployed, I'd sure as hell scrape up a few bucks for the kitty.

Edit: And, since the money is designated for healthcare, if a decent public option passed, I'd have no trouble with any outstanding funds going towards the public healthcare 'fund'.

[gdebs]

81. Primary fund

I thought of this too so I think your comment is right on. 
Some one who knows computers should organize this idea.

[RBInMaine]

37. Tell These People That CENTRISTS and even 50% of REPUBLICANS want public option !!

The message that these Dems need to hea over and over and over again is 72% ! 72% ! 72% ! .......
YES, 72% of ALL Americans want a public option, including 50% of registered Republicans, 87% of registered Democrats, and large majority of Independents. CENTRISTS and EVEN REGISTERED REPUBLICANS need to out there making their voices heard, not just MoveOn, etc. These organizations need to be showcasing these facts and showcasing individuals from the center and right of the political spectrum who support a public option. Howard Dean said it best: "What part of 72% don't you understand." So yes, keep up the pressure on these people and make them be Democrats.

[The Wizard]

38. If the Republicans weren't so screwy

the Democrats would be in the minority.
The fact that the guys doing the bribing are harming the vast majority to the benefit of the well heeled minority spells the end of our system of government.
And we thought the fascists were defeated in 1945.

[Aragorn]

41. haven't seen this point

so sorry if it is redundant. No one seems to note the "irony" that citizens' groups lobbying congress "might cause a backlash" - yet industry lobbyists seem likely to get congress to do what they want? This is a contradiction which suggests congress favors industry over citizens. right? Now why would they do that ($$$) ?

[L0oniX]

42. Our reps are mostly corrupt and there's nothing that is going to change that.

As Howard Zinn has said, the most important changes have only happened when people get out there and protest and march and cause civil disobedience on a mass scale. Reps will always turn their backs on us for re-election campaign money. It's obvious that large corporations with lobbyists, large campaign contributors and the media control this country and there's nothing you can do about it unless you have the guts to hit the streets in mass protest, bring this country to a halt and be willing to go to jail over it all.

[DaLittle Kitty]

55. We NEED A National Referendum For Campaign Finance Reform and Election Reform!

That is the ONLY way that we'll get REAL CHANGE! Cause you ARE RIGHT... ALL of these MF'ers from BOTH parties w/ very few exceptions are BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY CORPORATE AMERICA! Talk to John Russell, he'll tell ya!

[uberblonde]

43. I think we broke the Post.

The comments aren't loading. I think we overwhelmed their system.

[kooljerk666]

44. Putting pressure on Dem Senators....

Well, I am working with my state legislators to find any services, contracts or products being paid for by the state of Pennsylvania & benefiting the constituency's of anti-single payer DEMS!.

I have contacted the democratic state organizations in Maine, NH,VT,CT,Mass., RI,NY,NJ,PA,MD,OH, Michigan & Minnesota.

What I am urging people to do is contact their state reps & urge them to cut off spending in states with anti choice Senators. When products services or contracts are I.D.'d then contact then & let them know they are gonna take a beating cause their senator is working against our interests.

Hopefully we can enrage enough voters in Montana, Nebraska & Iowa to motivate Baucus & Nelson.

Specter & Feinstein are gonna be tough. Specter really wants to keep his job & feinstein does not think she could ever lose hers.

Bottom Line is many of these states are small & the economic might of PA, NY, & NJ ought to be enough to put the screws to them.

Also, contact tourism bureaus & let them know u have cancelled your NOLA vacation due to Mary Landrieu position on universal single payer. http://www.neworleanscvb.com

Our household also stopped buying all calif. wines, OJ & fresh produce from there.

I also have been cold calling every person named "Anderson" who lives in MT (i have done about 250#s) to explain to them where baucus gets his money & who he works for.

BTW both baucus & nelsons office told me to fuckoff since i was not a constituent, when i called them back & told them what I was up to, they were not laffing at all!

Specter is in my state but he did aqppear at a health care rally last week.
If he goes for single payer/universal He will have my vote.

If he & the dems double cross me I may work for Toomey just so dem senators would have to listen to his dumb shit for the next few years.

[flamingdem]

48. k+r

[4lbs]

49. They should ask these 9-12 ConservaDems why they want to prevent the American public from having

the same medical insurance that they themselves enjoy as members of Congress.

If the 'people' can't have it, then neither can they.

[MarjorieG]

50. Why waste effort to defy public option, Obama/Dems? Some aren't

as thick with lobbyists. Why not try to make the best possible public option. There will be worlds of differences to getting a good public option, with service and good economics..

[sandyd921]

52. Oh no, we musn't alienate centrist Democrats!

Gimme a break. Alienate them? They're supposed to be working for us not simply protecting the interests of their campaign funders (or at least I thought that's how it's supposed to work). This has nothing to do with the centrists' ideology. It has everything to do with their financial interests.

[EndElectoral]

69. I'm tired of centrists setting the agenda.

[Pushed To The Left]

87. Being against a public option isn't centrist, it's right wing. The public option is the centrist

compromise, and the conservative movement and insurance companies have brainwashed people into thinking it's a "far left" position. Despite the Democratic majority, this country is still WAY too far to the right.

[sandyd921]

91. Same thing.

Right wing, centrist...these so-called "ideologies" are based on the primacy of corporate interests and not the interests of the people. I also contend that there is no such thing as "centrist" ideology. The positions of these so-called "centrist" politicians are all about the interests of their corporate funders. Centrist/corporate politicians have made a pact with the (corporate) devil.

[Deep13]

57. I guess we are not willing to tolerate betrayal from our friends.

We know what Republicans are. We expect Democrats to behave better.

[No Elephants]

61. Not only is it about time that progressives are being more vocal, it's about time that

the press stops pretending that Republicans and maybe Blue Dogs are the only ones who are not happy right now.

[ooglymoogly]

62. bout time these backstabbing bastards are put in their place.

Hang em high in the town square and let them know who they work for. The time for nice is OVER.

[xchrom]

64. recommend

[TankLV]

67. Good for them! KEEP THE PRESSURE UP!!!

And if these so-called Democratic Reps don't "get it" - REPLACE THEM NEXT TIME AROUND!!!

[LaPera]

77. It is about time!

[LiberalLovinLug]

78. Moderate IS having a public option!

Single Payer option (which is the cheapest and most accessible also) is supposed to be the radical left-leaning socialist position.

(and I'm being bitterly sarcastic there.)

But that is what the state of the Democratic Party is these days, sarcastic version of the Repukes.

The Moderate position, even in this "government is the devil" rampage on both sides, is to have both a Public and Private option. And even this watered down, probably ultimately fated to fail, position is still too radical for the Blue Dogs?

Fucking astounding.

[LaPera]

83. YESSSSSS!

[Joanne98]

79. If they don't vote for a public option they're FIRED!

[and-justice-for-all]

84. Good, they need to be blitzed...

keep the pressure on the majority.

[MasonJar]

86. That list is too small. What about enlarging it to include Bayh et al.