Kucinich would have voted against FDR's Social Security plan and Medicare

[ProSense]

'I DON'T THINK HE GETS A PASS'....

<...>

But if Kucinich joins Republicans in killing health care reform -- as he has said he fully intends to do -- the millions of Americans who'd benefit from the Democratic proposals won't find much solace in Kucinich's deeply-held principles. They need a champion who'll make things better, not an idealist who'd rather wait until imaginary support materializes for a more perfect solution.

<...>

Markos said that Kucinich's willingness to deny help to those who need it is "completely reprehensible." Markos added, "I don't think he gets a pass; I don't care what his excuse is."

Watching Kucinich vow to vote with right-wing opponents of reform, it occurs to me that he almost certainly would have voted against FDR's Social Security plan, which was thin and weak when it was signed into law. He also would have rejected Medicare, because it wasn't ambitious at all when it passed.

Fortunately for all of us, lawmakers from those eras saw a value in establishing a strong foundation and then building on it in future years. In other words, fortunately for all of us, Social Security and Medicare weren't dependent on lawmakers like Dennis Kucinich.

Updated to add:

Kucinich voted against not only the public option, but also the climate change bill, physician payment reform, the pay as you go act, Obama's Budget, consumer protection act and even the reprimand of Joe "You lie" Wilson.

All no votes with Republicans.

[no limit]

1. Give me a fucking break. I love how people that can afford insurance are the offended ones

Kucinich is fighting for the people that can't poop out $200 a month because they will now be forced to buy health insurance from a private company, insurance they probably will never really get to take advantage of because of the high co-pays and deductibles.

So with all due respect to Markos and every other rich asshole telling people living pay check to pay check what they can and can't afford, fuck you.

[ProSense]

5. "Kucinich is fighting for the people that can't poop out $200 a month " So they can continue

contemplating how to poop more than $1,000 a month?

Context:

[no limit]

9. So after I refuted your bullshit yesterday you come back and copy and paste it here

nice job.

[ProSense]

11. Facts are not bullshit, and you refuted nothing. n/t

[no limit]

12. You tell me where I should come up with $200 I dont fucking have

You didn't anwser me yesterday, maybe you wanna take another stab at it?

[ProSense]

15. Apply for a hardship exemption

you're allowed to when the bill is passed. Currently, you can't come up with the more than $1,000 and cannot apply for an exemption.

[no limit]

16. What are the conditions for getting a hardship exemption?

I'm listening.

[ProSense]

21. Here:

You can't afford it.

Now, why is killing the bill better than significantly lowering cost and providing for those who may not be able to afford it?

[no limit]

23. I didnt see a link for getting a hardship exemption

Now why is killing the bill more important? because I have rent payments, car payments, and I have to put food on the table.

I know the fact that someone can't just make $200 appear out of thin air is a foreign concept to you.

[ProSense]

27. What?

"because I have rent payments, car payments, and I have to put food on the table."


Killing the bill and leaving in place a plan that's five times the cost of what it would be under reform helps you how?

[no limit]

54. Is this really that fucking hard for you to understand? You can't just make $200 u dont have appear

So eventhough I dont have insurance atleast I can afford other things that I need to get by. That wont be the case once this bill is in effect unless I can crap out $200 a month from nowhere.

[ProSense]

60. This makes no "fucking" sense

So eventhough I dont have insurance atleast I can afford other things that I need to get by. That wont be the case once this bill is in effect unless I can crap out $200 a month from nowhere.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HughMoran]

127. p

[HughMoran]

128. a

[Dappleganger]

86. You have car payments?

There's one of your problems right there.

[ncteechur]

81. subsidy

[Hello_Kitty]

89. He does not qualify for one. There was a whole thread about it. eom

[closeupready]

29. Considing the source to whom you are responding, that's unsurprising.

Just par for the course.

[grahamhgreen]

17. It's a minimum of $375/mo in Mass currently. nt

[Hello_Kitty]

85. Big fucking whoop.

If someone has $0 dollars left after paying their bills and eating, $2000 dollars might as well be $2 million. What part of "don't have the money" don't you people understand?

[SoxFan]

45. Where are the votes for single payer?

Please tell me how you get to 51 votes in the Senate. I'd love to hear this.

[no limit]

56. What are you talking about? I am not saying anything about single payer

I am telling you I dont have the money to buy the insurance you are forcing me to buy.

[vaberella]

64. I have no health insurance, inherited condition----and I hate Kucinich's vote.

And I can't afford health insurance. And I make too much to get medicaid.

[Cha]

66. dennis doesn't give any fucking breaks so no breaks

will be given to that little distorter.

And, to dennis and all those pols who would vote against health care reform that would help all the people who need health insurance but can't afford it and might not get it bc of their votes, Fuck you.

[no limit]

118. Help ALL the people? really? All? It wont help me, it will fuck me over

and there are millions in the same position that I am in.

[spoony]

2. GDP really needs that thread-posting limit again.

The entire forum is full of repetitive ProPaganda

[ProSense]

4. Because everyone knows the kill the bill distortions aren't "repetitive ProPaganda"? n/t

[spoony]

7. At least they're posted by different people.

I know a man's got to make a living, but shit.

[ProSense]

10. Lame.

Apparently, you're just upset that fact and opinions counter to "kill the bill" make it on the board. And before you offer another lame response, refute put up a valid argument to anything in the OP.

[arcadian]

57. No, you spamming the board is lame.

[HughMoran]

71. I charge $50/post

Think you can afford me?

:P

[AllentownJake]

102. Can I give you the talking points nt.

[HughMoran]

105. You can be my source for financial system talking points

;)

[AllentownJake]

107. I was going to write a talking point on

Why you can't seem to get rid of your halitosis and body odor. If I'm going to pay someone to say something, fuck finance, I want a laugh.

[HughMoran]

109. lol

That made me laugh :rofl:

You're off to a good start ;)

[frylock]

28. fuckin a

[SoxFan]

46. Oh, did we hurt your feelings?

Look, almost every anti-Kooch thread has been locked after his zealots went and whined to the mods. The fact of the matter is an overwhelming majority of Democrats don't buy Kucinic's grandstanding and faux moral purity. They want progress, even if it is incremental.

[karynnj]

63. Definately true

What surprises is me is the quickness of locking for threads with criticism of Kucinich that would be mild compared to what is routinely thrown at Obama, Kerry (even if the topic is something he did that no one has a problem with), Dean either Clinton or any of a number of Obama administration people in threads that are never locked. This in spite of the fact that all 5 of those politicians were supported at different points by at least 30% of Democrats - not the 5% or less that Kucinich get.

[Bobbie Jo]

77. Couldn't agree more. nt

[Number23]

84. "What surprises is me is the quickness of locking for threads with criticism of Kucinich

that would be mild compared to what is routinely thrown at Obama, Kerry etc."

Absolutely. This place has gotten rather stupid.

[Sebastian Doyle]

58. Not only do we need the thread posting limit back

We also need to modify it, so you can only have so many threads devoted to any one subject (i.e. bashing the living shit out of a DEMOCRATIC congressman who is doing his goddamn job and voting in the best interest of the American people.)

The last two days are the worst attack I have ever seen on a Democrat on a supposedly "Democratic" board.

[karynnj]

62. Yep there were far too many Dennis is a hero, patriot etc posts yesterday

Many from the same people.

[lamp_shade]

3. I think he's just awful. I never considered him presidential material, but I used to like the guy.

He's an embarrassment now.

[John Q. Citizen]

6. Yep and I think Markos would have voted for NAFTA. (Kucinich voted against)

I also think Obama would have voted for NAFTA.

Thanks a lot, Obama.

[ProSense]

8. Were the lives of more than 40,000 people annual on the line with NAFTA? n/t

[grahamhgreen]

19. Perhaps, and certainly the livelihoods of tens of millions. nt

[ProSense]

24. Perhaps? Lives, not livelihoods. Losing a job is not equivalent to losing your life. Period. n/t

[grahamhgreen]

30. Suicide, deprivation, and unemployment: record linkage study

"Conclusions

The association between suicide and unemployment is more important than the association with other socioeconomic measures. Although some potentially important confounders were not adjusted for, the findings support the idea that unemployment or lack of job security increases the risk of suicide and that social and economic policies that reduce unemployment will also reduce the rate of suicide."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC28707/


Privatisation 'raised death rate' - BBC

"But Russia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were worst affected, with a tripling of unemployment and a 42% increase in male death rates between 1991 and 1994. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7828901.stm

[ProSense]

32. WTF? Are 40,000 people losing their lives annually as a result of NAFTA.

Get a damn grip.

[karynnj]

65. There were less than 40,000 suicides annually in the US

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/suicide-in-the-us-statistics-and-prevention/index.shtml

Not to mention the main cause is depression, which can happen even if you are wealthy and have a dream job and wonderful friends and family.

[John Q. Citizen]

37. Many more than that, actually. Millions of dead Mexicans, millions of dead Americans, and

the Clintons and Bushes doing quite well, thank you. They get together on weekends on the boat, you know.

I haven't had health insurance since 1993.

My ex-wife is an apprentice carpenter and she can't afford to use her shitty insurance. meanwhile this bill will kick my kids off CHIP and they won't qualify for Medicaid.

So they can go from decent coverage to shitty coverage. My kids won't get to keep their insurance. Obama is a liar.

Why do you and Obama hate my kids? (By The way, I edited to point out that this is a rhetorical question. I know that you and Obama do not in fact "hate my kids." It's just that my kids are certainly secondary to Obama's political ambitions, and their welfare isn't of primary concern to either you, or Obama. But it is to me.)


Clinton, and the Dems that voted for NAFTA have never taken responsibility for that vote. Just as Obama and the Dems who support this insurance company bailout bill won't take responsibility for this when it becomes obvious to everyone that it's a bad bill.

I have to watch out for my own kids, and so I'm opposing this bill. Because it's obvious that Obama is watching out for his friends in the insurance industry, just like Bill did before him.

Kucinich stood for the people of Cleveland when he was Mayor, even though he paid a terrible personal price. He stood for what was right because he's a courageous human being who really doesn't care about the names you might try to call him to try to cow him into doing your bidding. That's what courage is, it's something many people don't understand, apparently.

To bad Obama just kisses ass on the rich and powerful and doesn't have the cajones to stand up for what's right. He doesn't, and his fawning followers are a cowardly bunch of "yes man" lackies, which ever sex they may happen to be.

By the way, I don't hate Obama. I just think this bill is very bad law for a whole lot of reasons, some of them personal and most of them because it's very bad public policy and precedent to force people to buy a private product from criminal conspiracies doing business as insurance companies.

i applaud the courage of Kucinich, that he's again willing to stand up for what he believes is right even in the face of whithering contempt and scorn even from his own party. It's restored my faith in humans to be a positive force instead of just a selfish self-serving force.

[karynnj]

67. NAFTA needs revision, but the majority of the effects were

happening whether or not NAFTA passed - the problem was the impact of there being a global economy. This frees companies from depending on the local labor pools. If you think about it, this change has the impact of the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution created an environment where the companies had all the power and the workers, none. Unions provided a correcting balance. But, their power rested on the fact that it was non-economic for the company to replace all of them. The global economy has altered that balance - and it is not obvious how to repair it. It might actually be that the solution is a new fairer trade law.

[John Q. Citizen]

101. Before there was NAFTA there wasn't the ability to move into mexico and set up shop.

It was illegal under Mexican law.

Just as it was illegal for Mexican truckers to zip on over the boarder into the US without undergoing complete inspections based on state laws as well as Federal laws.

The industrial revolution and NAFTA aren't equivalent in any way. NAFTA is a legal framework that allows goods and capital to flow across boarders. It could be gone tomorrow should nation states decide to alter or abolish that frame work.

The industrial revolution happened in both capitalist as well as communist countries. It isn't synonymous with capitalism, anymore than learning how to hybrid grains is synonymous with communal agriculture or with farmers co-operatives, or with capitalist factory farms. Creating rice, corn and wheat did allow for larger population centers since there was a storable supply of food, but the organization of those people was up to those people not up to the technology.

You are confusing social organization with technological advances. They aren't the same thing. They can and do effect each other, but that doesn't make them the same.

[Jennicut]

13. DK makes some strange decisions sometimes. In waiting for the perfect bills to come along, he stops

initial progress. I agree with many of his principals. But he is being so obstinate that he will accomplish nothing in the name of those principals. He is neither horrible nor a hero to me. I understand where he is coming from. But I also understand the reality of politics. You have to start somewhere. He won't even take the first step.

[GreenArrow]

43. "He won't even take the first step."

Well, when the first step leads you to fall into a tiger pit, or step on a landmine, or walk over a cliff, or involves putting a yoke around one's own neck, maybe taking that first step isn't such a great idea. Maybe a better move is step backwards, so one can see and think more clearly about where one wants to go. Personally, I hope he persists. Any bill that includes mandatory purchase of for-profit centered private insurance is an absolute non-starter and no-sell for me.

There's a loverly irony in this whole sequence, what with Obama et al making compromise after compromise, and getting virtually nothing in return, and now Kucinich gets to be castigated for not compromising (I think he would, if his colleagues were in earnest about passing "real" reform, but which, frankly, they are not.)

The whole performance on Health Care, on both sides of the aisle, has been embarrassing and insulting, with few exceptions, among whom I'd count Congressman Kucinich.

[Jennicut]

52. Backwards....into nothingness. When will we come back to HCR?

I guess the issue is some of us believe it is a good first step and some of us think nothing is better.
That is okay. That is what debate here is for.

[GreenArrow]

55. I'd say drop the big assed overwrought pork and loophole

and focus on passing single, specific segments of it, pre-existing conditions, for example.

[John Q. Citizen]

51. Dennis said early last year that he would vote against any bill that lacked

a robust public option.

He's sticking to the promise he made to his voters.


I see that as courageous and a sign that he posses integrity.

I guess some would prefer he say one thing and that he do another, like Obama has done repeatedly.


Last April or May, Rahm Emmanuel defined success as getting any bill passed, regardless of what that bill contains.

So the content of the bill isn't what is important to the Obama White House, only that a bill is passed regardless of how good or how bad that bill may be.

Some people confuse this for leadership, but I'm not one of them. Obama wasted an entire year pretending that he was going to pass a bi-partisan bill. Did you fall for that? Neither did I. But I think Obama still thinks we did.

[Hansel]

97. He has no political instinct.

He is more likely to do damage to his causes than to move them along simply because he's missing that bone in his head.

[DirkGently]

14. Integrity is not the enemy here

Kucinich said something that badly needed to be said. If no one will stand up for what we actually NEED, instead of what we're being urged to accept and call a victory, then we're stuck with limp-wristed partisan hackery forever.

Markos is wrong about this. Guy bugs me anyway.

[ProSense]

18. Integrity in denying people whose lives depend on it the opportunity to have what he enjoys? n/t

[DirkGently]

33. Integrity as in intellectual honesty

This bill is not the reform we voted for, nor the reform we need. And don't kid yourself it's going to save anyone. What everyone's mincing around is that it's a gift to health insurance companies, which will only worsen the problem.

[ProSense]

36. Intellectual honesty like voting against and then for the exact same SCHIP bill? n/t

[DirkGently]

38. Intellectual honesty like

backing a public healthcare option and continuing to back it, because it's what we need, instead of giving away the farm and then trying to scrape out a weak, compromised mess and call it a day. Intellectual honesty as in the courage to argue for the truth, rather than the convenient.

[ProSense]

40. "backing a public healthcare option " He voted against the bill that included the PO. n/t

[DirkGently]

44. And he explained his reasoning

which you quoted above, and you dismiss it. And yet it's pretty clear that 1) He's not hurting or "killing" the Dems' bill ala Lieberman, and 2) he's using his vote to keep bringing up the importance of a meaningful public option, which he apparently didn't see in the prior bill.

So basically you're just furious he's not doing what you want him to, despite the fact he looks to have the least impeachable motives of ANYONE in the healthcare debate.

Too bad.

[RedstDem]

20. Go Denny Go

Wish we had more like him.

[grahamhgreen]

22. No, the problem is the senate bill is fundamentally unsound unless it includes Medicare expansion or

a public option or similar.

Why not just pass those fixes first, and then we can pass the bill?

[ProSense]

26. "a public option or similar." Evidently "or similar" doesn't count

Because a plan similar to the plan Congress has that goes a step further by including a non-profit plan isn't good enough:

More Health Insurance Choices

• Multi-state option. Health insurance carriers will offer plans under the supervision of the Office of Personnel Management, the same entity that oversees health plans for Members of Congress. At least one plan must be non-profit, and the plans will be available nationwide. This will promote competition and choice.
  
  
• Free choice vouchers. Workers who qualify for an affordability exemption to the individual responsibility policy but do not qualify for tax credits can take their employer contribution and join an exchange plan.

PDF

Neither is a state single payer provision.

[grahamhgreen]

110. If one of these plans offered were administered by Medicare, I could get on board.

[Oregone]

25. Another 2 minutes of hate. Wheeeeee

[rug]

31. This shit in Congress isn't Social Security or Medicare.

[ProSense]

34. When the "shit" saves lives and reduces the burden for millions of Americans

no one will care about the previous opposition to it.

[ericgtr]

35. I don't get why people are defending him, name any other dem that voted with the GOP that much

I don't care if it's because he's a super-liberal, it's still voting with the Republicans on nearly all major issues.

[Fire1]

94. BINGO!!! n/t

[HughMoran]

39. Sadly, I think this may be true

Nothing but a perfect bill is apparently good enough for him. There is a time when symbolism fails - voting against a historic bill as a protest would be one of those times.

[ProSense]

41. Kucinich supported the "weak" public option, then voted against it, now complains that it's out

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH (D), OHIO: Ed, it‘s good to be with you. And I just want to say that the characterization that I don‘t care is not correct. I do care. I care that this bill privatizes health care, that it took out public option, that it doesn‘t protect states that want to create a single payer system. And that, in fact, there is no control in premiums. I care a lot about that.

SCHULTZ: OK. Then why not give the president a victory and vote for it?

KUCINICH: Well, this isn‘t about whether the president has a victory. This is about whether the American people are going to win. If you give the insurance companies $70 billion, why do they have to put the middleman in there? Why do they have to be in there at all? Why not just create a system where the money goes right to the people without the insurance companies getting a cut? Why do you have to give the insurance companies a cut? Why was the public option taken out? Why can‘t states have the ability to create their own single payer system without getting attacked by...

SCHULTZ: That‘s a great point, Congressman. And you know I‘ve got great respect for you. I saw the president yesterday. It‘s the most passionate he‘s been. He admitted that they‘re going to be getting 30 million more customers. But, you know, they‘re a big player at table and this is all a part of negotiation. Can‘t you accept some incremental steps? And the public option‘s not dead with this letter that‘s being circulated over on the Senate side. If you guys in the House vote yes on this and come back through reconciliation in the Senate, we might get the public option. But we can‘t do it if there are people on the left such as yourself—I got great respect for you—who are saying, no way, can‘t do it. What about this scenario?

KUCINICH: Well, you have to remember, Ed, I started out with a compromise on the public option. I voted for it in committee. And I also passed through committee an amendment that would protect the right of states to have single payer. I had worked to compromise. And I‘m not beyond trying to see if there is a way to work out a bill. But what‘s happened is that every step that you look at to try to improve the bill, the insurance companies keep winning. And every time they win, their stocks go up and the American people are getting ready to be hosed by this.

link

The question then becomes, why did he vote against the bill that included the public option?

Kucinich is hopping from one excuse to another.

[Cha]

83. "And, you have to remember Schuster..

that this is about me..not the President":silly:

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ShortnFiery]

47. No, I asked you before, but now - I believe that YOU HAVE NO SHAME.

:thumbsdown:

[ProSense]

48. You have no point. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

49. Of course I do. In fact, the vast majority here have fully processed it. eom

[ProSense]

50. "the vast majority here" Is this a crutch or were you elected spokesperson? You have no point. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

75. Perhaps your behavior just stands for itself?

;) :hi:

[zulchzulu]

53. K&R for the truth

The Civil Rights legislation took a couple iterations before blacks could vote. That wasn't in the first bill.

Koochie would gone wah-wah-wacko on that too. He's a shameless oaf.

[DevonRex]

59. K&R. I'd like to ask Kooch why he thinks a perfect bill will EVER come out

of Congress. I've never seen one. He appears unwilling and unable to function in the real world of How a Bill Becomes Law. So why is Dennis even there? Did he ever take an American Government class? Did he think he could wave a magic wand and government would magically change because of his mere presence in the House of Representatives?

Does he think that his "no" votes are somehow different from Republicans' "no" votes? No is no. Period. If he votes with the Republicans he might as well BE a Republican and I regard him with the same contempt as I do them.

[Cha]

68. Steve Benen has it dead on.

"But if Kucinich joins Republicans in killing health care reform -- as he has said he fully intends to do -- the millions of Americans who'd benefit from the Democratic proposals won't find much solace in Kucinich's deeply-held principles. They need a champion who'll make things better, not an idealist who'd rather wait until imaginary support materializes for a more perfect solution.

"Fortunately for all of us, lawmakers from those eras saw a value in establishing a strong foundation and then building on it in future years. In other words, fortunately for all of us, Social Security and Medicare weren't dependent on lawmakers like Dennis Kucinich."

[stranger81]

69. Bullshit. DK is one of the only Dems on the hill today that will support real reform --

not the incrementalist, Third Way bullshit we're being offered now to placate the corporate masters of DK's peers. It should be patently obvious that the people who would NOT have voted for Social Security, Medicare etc. are exactly the same people now insisting that DK STFU and get in line.

What pisses you off, apparently, is that DK is not a lapdog, and actually has a few principles. There should be a place in Congress for at least one person who represents an actual left-of-center viewpoint.

[Mike K]

74. Well said, Stranger 81.

This thread is a small-scale reminiscence of the arguments for and against accepting the compromise offered by the British East India Tea Company or to stand up and tell King George to go to hell, which is what Dennis Kucinich metaphorically intends to do with his vote against what unquestionably is a shameful compromise.

Unlike Obama and a depressing percentage of so-called Democrats, who collectively amount to an auxiliary branch of the emerging corporatocracy, Kucinich is a fighter. He is a revolutionary. And, as much of the commentary found in this thread clearly attests, he is beset by Tories who are eagerly willing to accept compromise rather than thumb their nose at the nobility and fight for what they rightfully deserve -- which is at least a viable Public Option.

[ncteechur]

80. Well currently he isn't supporting shit.

no no no no no no

(Kucinich's latest voting record)

[GreenArrow]

82. well, in this case he certainly isn't supporting shit

given that he plans on voting against this shit bill.

[stranger81]

123. Correct, he's not voting for incrementalist bullshit.

Never has, probably never will. And kudos to him for that.

[Fire1]

95. But the people lose either way b/c government hc/hi will

never happen. Principles don't help those in desperate need of health insurance.

[stranger81]

124. And neither do mandates without a meaningful public option.

But keep singing slogans to yourself as if they mean something.

[Cha]

98. Bullshit is what dk is all about..The OP stated he wouldn't

have supported SS because it wasn't good enough..and that's exactly what he's doing now.

[stranger81]

125. Again, I think that's exactly backwards. The Third Way creeps running the show now

would never have supported Social Security or Medicare because they're not sufficiently corporate-friendly. Trying to pin that tail on the DK donkey is wrong and reflects a studied ignorance of the real divide between DK & the rest of the party.

DK is one of the only Democrats left who supports real, genuine reform -- in the health insurance arena and lots of others. You and the others criticizing him want nothing to do with real reform, and are pissed off that he won't settle for the same old pig with a new coat of lipstick.

[asdjrocky]

70. Man that's some crystal ball you have.

How would have DK stood on the civil war? Please do tell us.

[totodeinhere]

72. The sycophants who are supporting the crappy bill just because it has a "D" after it are making..

me sick. And then they have the temerity to go after one of the few true progressives who have not sold out to the health insurance and pharmaceutical companies, Dennis Kucinich. They have no shame. Down with the DLC Dinos. Up with true progressivism.

[ProSense]

73. "They have no shame." Congressman Grayson supports the bill.

I know, "who gives a shit." He's just another sellout. Right?

[ShortnFiery]

76. No, more like a USEFUL corporate enhancing shill who feigns populism.

When this bill reveals itself as the piece of shit that it is, Grayson will plead "ignorance" of the fact that the Senate couldn't adjust it during reconciliation.

There's always someone else to blame for the PSEUDO-progressives like Grayson and Howard Dean.

[totodeinhere]

93. ShortnFiery, thank you. I appreciate you honesty.n/t

[ProSense]

96. "PSEUDO-progressives like Grayson and Howard Dean." What?

Who said anything Grayson being Progress? Kucinich is a grandstander. Accept it.

Before 2004, he was pro-life.

He voted with Republican in support of a Constitutional amendment banning flag burning!!!!

Stop pretending he's the most progressive person in Congress simply because he votes no on bill.





edited missing word.

[spoony]

119. The mistake you're making

is assuming that progressives are as obsessed with personality and following people as you are. You can't silence dissent with that appeal to authority bullshit.

[totodeinhere]

126. I respectfully disagree with Grayson on this. But I can name you many other bona fide progressives..

who oppose this bill.

[QC]

78. Kucinich would have strangled Baby Jesus, right there in his manger. n/t

[donco6]

104. And then ate him. n/t

[QC]

106. Dipped in young dog sauce. n/t

[Cha]

108. Stupid analogy that doesn't distract for a second

from what he actually would have missed out on given his history of doing nothing.

[ibegurpard]

79. what shit

you have no way of knowing this

[warm regards]

87. Incredible...

How can you be so sure?

[DCBob]

88. And probably would have introduced a motion to bring the soldiers home from WW2 before it was over..

because it was taking too long.

[AllentownJake]

103. We beat Hitler in 4 years nt.

[inna]

90. What ridiculous nonsense.

:thumbsdown:

[ipaint]

91. LOL. nt

[IndianaGreen]

92. Obama would have given us individual retirement accounts NOT Social Security

Obama's opposition to Medicare for all, as in HR676 and Rep. Grayson's bill introduced today, speaks volumes as to how he would had gutted LBJ's Medicare.

God only knows what Obama would have done in response to the rise of fascism in Europe.

[goclark]

99. We are not in Europe, this is 2010

and we need to get on with providing Americans quality HEALTH CARE who have none.

I say, everyone that thinks the Bill is "a bad bill" and wants to stop it should Give Up THEIR HEATH CARE INSURANCE and the INSURANCE for ALL MEMBERS of their FAMILY ~ immediately!

We know that is NOT going to happen because only those that are in the PARTY OF NO or their Buddies,are speaking load and clear ~ NO, NO, NO."

Dennis ~ "Give It Up!"

Give Up your health care Insurance TODAY!

GIU or Shut Up and Vote for the Bill!

[IndianaGreen]

100. Is a good thing the Britsh troops at Dunkirk didn't have to wait for Prime Minister Obama

to decide when to send ships to rescue them.

[bvar22]

111. And you know this HOW?

Or are you making stuff up again?

Link

[ProSense]

112. Here:

link

[Cleita]

113. Now you are getting really ridiculous.

Take a break. You are breathing fumes. Hate Kucinich if you like but at least really read about how Medicare came about before you say crap like this.

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/corning.html

[ProSense]

114. Nothing silly about it.

Go tell Steve Benen to take a break, he wrote it.

As for Kucinich's no votes cited in the OP, he owns those.

[Cleita]

115. You can tell him for me. n/t

[jeanpalmer]

116. Who just appointed Erskine Bowles

to the deficit reduction committee?

It's pretty clear who is going to undermine SS and Medicare, and it's not Dennis Kucinich.

[democracy1st]

117. +1

[NorthCarolina]

120. I am really growing tired of this anti-DK DLC claptrap littering the pages of DU.

whatever...... :boring:

[KingFlorez]

121. It's very interesting

He can vote with the Republicans and still make it appear to some like he's being progressive. He's really clever about it. What is his real angle here?

[joe black]

122. FDR

I don't recall FDR making my parents buy health care from a private insurance company. Forcing me to buy something is not right.

[dflprincess]

129. Obama would have supported handing your retirement money to private investors

And, given that the DLC has Social Security & Medicare on their list of things that need "reform", he probably does support just that.