dagblog - Comments for "Deadlock Redux"

Yeah, you are right. I worked

bluesplashy — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:21:06 +0000

Yeah, you are right. I worked part time in one of those corner stores and on Sunday I would get abused by some regular customers for reading the NY Times. I just laughed. But there was one man that would always tell there was no cheaper education available on a daily basis.

Good link, Blue Splashy and,

wwstaebler — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:36:46 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

Good link, Blue Splashy and, if it were believed, persuasive. But when was the last time you convinced one of your Charleston friends that the NYT is a reliable, objective source? ;-)

What an excellent analysis,

wwstaebler — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:30:17 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

What an excellent analysis, Maxine. You are right that a conflict between "big govt." and state's rights was a fundamental motivator for the south in the "war of northern aggression," which is still an open wound for many, as crazy as that may be. You are also right that resurgent fundamentalism seems to promote punishment of perceived sin rather than forgiveness and inclusion. And Civil Rights legislation did cause a backlash for two decades that gradually lessened during the 80's and 90's through the election of Obama but which, since then, is fueling up again.
All that said, I am still baffled that someone so intrinsically kind, so well-traveled and so seasoned could mimic any of these views, and for the first time.

So true. Thanks, M.

wwstaebler — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:13:29 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

So true. Thanks, M.

Note: Hey -- I did not

wwstaebler — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:09:18 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

Note: Hey -- I did not repost this. I don't know why it surfaced again.
So, Everyone, please feel free to ignore, or, if you want to continue the discussion, could we, at this point, move it beyond the personal example I gave to the big picture? Thank you, one and all.

Well in the context of

Libertine — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 20:02:23 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

Well in the context of Wendy's story I get no indication that her friend is against HCR because it is not really reform at all...I have been against HCR for that exact reason myself. It seems she would be against any reform...period...because regulating business is anti-American and limits our freedom (as we remain wage slaves to rich oligarchs).

Some of you seem to be

Gettysburg — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:47:16 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

Some of you seem to be missing the point.

The proposals being offered by the president and Congress are a far cry from a single payer system. More specifically, they are a far cry from a national health care plan. Instead, what we have is a concoction of political compromises (within the Democratic caucus) and partial fixes to a few of the overwhelming problems plaguing the system.

Most people in favor of the president's proposals readily admit that it's far from being perfect, but it's better than nothing.

Really?

Are you going to benefit one iota from it?

I've raised the following question on two other threads but nobody has come forward with a clear opinion.

If the Senate uses reconciliation to amend their own bill, and if the House subsequently passes that modified Senate bill, and Obama signs it into law...

Does that take us a step CLOSER to one day having a single payer system (or, if not that, a REAL national health care plan), or does it take us a step further AWAY from one day having a single payer system?

For my two cents, if this patchwork plan gets shoved through, no Congress (or president) is going to have any desire to take up the health care issue again for a very long time. If the plan fails, I think the Democrats have moved the meter to the point where people now expect reform, better reform, and would demand that this issue be taken up again next year.

Other people disagree with me on that. But even the Republicans cannot seriously look to the status quo any longer. The Democrats are risking putting the Republicans back in power over what amounts to a shitty proposal.

Is it worth it?

Obama still has 3 years left in his term. In my opinion, if they wait another year, there will be some bi-partisanship and both sides can save face.

It sounds to me that your

Libertine — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:28:44 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

It sounds to me that your friend has been successfully 'programmed' Wendy. As far as I am concerned the right has been waging psy-ops on the American people. But they are conflicted on many fronts. Government control of health is bad, it is socialism. Government control over a woman and her 'right to chose' is good, Christian morality. If you notice most of the rabidly anti-big government types are only against government being involved in business issues or the economy. When it comes to personal choice issues they seem perfectly happy to have the strong arm of a big government there to enforce the rules. There is a perfectly good explanation for this disconnect. On economic issues business interests have poured tens of billions of dollars into an ad campaign, one that amounts to psy-ops, to protect their turf. They have successfully demonized any attempt at regulation of business as a socialist plot to destroy America and enslave the American people.

If only I could apply my

readytoblowagasket — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 17:43:34 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

If only I could apply my powers of discernment to my own life, LOL!

Thanks, ww. I sincerely appreciate your comment.

This post really stuck with

Maxine Udall (girl economist) — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 17:01:46 +0000

In reply to Deadlock Redux

This post really stuck with me, ww. It is such a perfect example of the disconnect induced by an irrational focus on some slacker ne'er-do-well getting something for nothing and the guvmint that forces us all to support it. Better to leave 30 million uninsured to prevent the undeserving small fraction from getting freebies. Talk about a brake on economic growth!

Having lived in the south and in some parts of the west where these sorts of sentiments seem to be more dominant, I have alternately hypothesized that it has something to do with 1) the "war of Northern aggression" (i.e., the federal guvmint fought, burned, and pillaged, stole "property", altered a preferred albeit unjust societal structure, and then sent in carpetbaggers who prolonged the pain); 2) an "old time religion" that focuses more on sin and retribution than on love and justice; or 3) the federal guvmint's role in ending Jim Crow laws and codifying civil rights (along with its role in prosecuting racists who had been acquitted by local juries under federal law during the civil rights movement).

Oversimplified, but when I lived there I was struck by how "alive" the US civil war is for many southerners. And if you accept their initial premise that it was about states' rights, then animosity to the federal guvmint follows like the night the day. The fact that the federal guvmint liberated and then eventually enforced rights for an extremely disenfranchised and discriminated group simply (within the mindset I'm describing) reinforces the perception that it only helps the "undeserving." The religion thing provides scaffolding by providing a world view in which Jesus should have thrown the first stone and "as you do to the least of these" is turned on its head and interpreted as divine instruction to implement a tough love program for the sick, the hungry, the thirsty and the naked, since, of course, that is how they would want to treat Jesus.

I've found that friendship requires me to accept and somehow love my friends' limitations, knowing that theirs is the larger challenge, to do the same for me. I wonder if she can love the part of you that is so different from her?

And I wonder how she feels about welfare programs for bankers who cheat? :-)