It appears to have gotten folks' attention. It was received with over 500+ reads and commenting that was somewhat spirited (to put it mildly)
And, what Genghis posted really hit the mark about the Nader debate:
I desperately wish that Nader would disappear into a black hole--if only so that I wouldn't have to read any more angry debates about whether or not he's a narcissistic jerk who made Gore lose. On the other hand, his disappearance would probably just provoke a fresh round of eulogies and denunciations, and it would be worse than ever.
So maybe it would be better if all the people who believe that Nader's character is an important topic to rehash yet again for the sake of posterity and/or the google wayback machine would suddenly disappear into a black hole where they could flame each other to their heart's content--or as much as is possible within the bowels of a singularity. I'd be cool with that.
Thank you Genghis. Because, the actual crux of the message I posted was totally overlooked, just by the presence of the announcement of Nader jumping into the spotlight.
The real message is about: Should progressives challenge Obama in the Democratic primaries?
Here is the latest in California with the state's ongoing implementation of the Affordable Health Care Act.
It would also be interesting to hear what's going on in other states' local legislative processes and implementation of the Act.
The following bullet points found at California Progress Organization are taken from a report by Anthony Wright, the Executive Director of Health Access California, the statewide health care consumer advocacy coalition of over 200 groups.
For those of you that reside in other states and don’t know what the new reform could be doing in your states if implemented, the following information is intended to assist you in expanding your understanding of what can be done if the implementation is organized in a reasonably rational manner.
The examination of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, the only federally funded voucher program in the country, by the department’s Institute of Education Sciences, found that students who attended a private school through the program performed worse on standardized tests than their public school counterparts who did not use the vouchers.
In the 1990s, Americans learned more about the appalling conditions at the factories and opposition to sweatshops surged. But some economists pushed back. For them, the wages and conditions in sweatshops might be appalling, but they are an improvement on people’s less visible rural poverty. Expecting to prove the experts right, we went to Ethiopia and performed the first randomized trial of industrial employment on workers. Little did we anticipate that everything we believed would turn out to be wrong.
[....] “I’m pro-environment, I’m pro-trade, I’m anti-debt, I’m pro-immigration, I’m pro-NATO,” Kasich continued. “And when I look at the party, I see it moving in a different direction. But I’ve always said I have the right to define what it means to be a Republican and a conservative.”
[.....] classic Trump: Confident, hyperbolic and insistent on asserting control.
But interviews with nearly two dozen aides, allies, and others close to the president paint a different picture – one of a White House on a collision course between Trump’s fixed habits and his growing realization that this job is harder than he imagined when he won the election on Nov. 8 [....]
Republican legislators want to keep popular Obamacare provisions for themselves and their staff.
Suggestion: take a few moments to help this story go viral, then when it does, watch the "wavering" GOP moderates decide they can't vote for it. (If you haven't been following the news on this, the House Freedom Caucus has given their support.)
Wednesday afternoon, nearly the entire membership of the US Senate packed into a bus and headed to the White House grounds for an unprecedented classified briefing from top Trump administration officials on North Korea policy. Such a huge meeting, on such a volatile topic, had people wondering — was the United States about to announce some risky new policy on North Korea? Perhaps some kind of scary military escalation, or even a preemptive strike on a nuclear-armed power?