Kill the Bill? F#@& That.

And Bart Stupak should rot in hell. (4.00 / 1)

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 15:28:22 PM CDT

100 percent agreement (4.00 / 1)

from me --even the well used curse words!  This is a WOW post!

---

by: Gayla @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 15:50:25 PM CDT

This bill is a piece of sausage. It needs to pass. (0.00 / 0)

Most anything of more import than a Proclamation of Groundhog Day that gets through Congress is a piece of sausage.  Look away while the grinder is running.

I can't believe the political fundamentalists on our side are ready to kill it.  Progress, people.  It's what happens when you take as much as you can get, but you don't walk away empty handed.

Tomorrow I hope we're all celebrating a progressive victory, not bitching that we didn't get everything we wanted.  No one ever does.  Live with it!

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 16:50:11 PM CDT

I love your calm measured respectful diaries. (4.00 / 3)

Here's one more reason you are right. No matter what else you (or they) can say about this bill- no matter how watered down, piecemeal, weak-kneed it is, it is a victory. 

Over the GOP? Well maybe, but who the hell cares about that washed up old collection of white Southern men?

Over the blue-dogs?  Not really, since the got almost everything they wanted in this bill.

No!  We have finally won a victory over the eff-ing corporations in this country who have been controlling us and abusing us without mitigation for decades.  The corporations that have been the bankroll of all Republicans and far too many DINOs, the corporations that our SCOTUS has declared to have the rights of individual human beings-in the face of all the obvious fact that they have none of the identifying characteristics thereof.

Now. Let's pass the Economic regulation bill, and then re-pass the election reform bill, specifically negating the recent SCOTUS decision.  Then, at last, flesh and blood persons will start to have the rights on artificially created corporate persons.

 

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead  

---

by: piggieheart @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:08:07 PM CDT

Yes We Can! (4.00 / 1)

And yes this is a victory. 

If the DINO's and bluedogs are rewarded and reelected for voting against health care reform we will deserve what we will get.

Let us march on and pass the economic regulation bill,the election reform bill, negating the recent SCOTUS decision.  Let's restore honesty,dignity and integrity to our justice department.  Let's close Gitmo.  Let's bring our troops home. 

Let us march on until victory is won!

Let's Roll!

 

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:13:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

From your lips.... (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Gayla @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:24:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hear him, hear him! (4.00 / 2)

Although, I think the SCOTUS monstrosity will need a constitutional amendment to be negated.  Something along the lines of:

"A Corporate person is not a natural person and no article or amendment may grant any rights to a corporate person as an extension of rights of natural persons"

Or something like that. 

"The War in Iraq is not the disease. The War in Iraq is a symptom. Arrogance is the disease" - Bill Richardson

---

by: herding old cats @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:31:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And BTW, MaryScott, (4.00 / 2)

Big Orange's loss is Little Purple's gain.

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead  

---

by: piggieheart @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:09:27 PM CDT

And I can definately relate to being punished (0.00 / 0)

for being too liberal Mary Scott O'Conner.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:16:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You lost your privileges for being erroneous (4.00 / 2)

For not correcting those errors, and for not even responding to my concerns about your writing product. 

Stop trying to revise history.  On Nov. 4 you posted this diary indicating that a congressional candidate was on the way to Princeton for a fundraiser instead of at the Magic City Classic.  You did not correct the diary when a commenter pointed out that was in fact false. I posted this in a comment on that diary:

You are absolutely entitled to your opinion and to include your opinion in any diary. But front page privileges come with a somewhat higher responsibility -- to make an attempt to check information before you report it, because you are reporting to a rather wide audience here. Expressing opinion is fair game, and so is passing on interesting information from other sources, but I remind you that you do have a responsibility to our readers to make a good faith attempt to insure information is accurate before you pass it on.  We aren't a gossip sheet, nor do we want to be one.  I say this publicly because all our readers need to know that the facts matter to us here. Our readers may prefer to fact check for themselves -- good for them -- but I hope they don't catch us in errors very often. Facts matter, that's job one for me, and an important guideline for our front pagers.  

You decided not to respond.

On Nov. 5 you received a reminder (not the first time you had been reminded) of the rules for front pagers, including # 3 which reads:

3)  We need to be a fact based blog.  Opinion is fine, but what is opinion and what is fact needs to be clear.  Speculation is ok, but the basis or lack thereof should be clear.  Include links wherever possible because that gives us credibility and makes us a more valuable reference source for others.  When you have a choice of linking to a blog or a primary news source (newspaper, government agency, etc.) link to the primary news source, keeping in mind that some blogs do original reporting and thus are primary news sources. This is the message I sent when your privileges were revoked:

No response.  On Nov. 9 I again sent you a message asking that you tone down the outrage and anger.  No response.  On Nov. 10, I sent the same message again in case you had missed it.  No response.  You have both my phone # and my email address so there's no excuse for not contacting me.  During this timeframe your writing became steadily more "outraged" and you continued to post assertions not only unsupported by fact, but unsupportable by fact.  On Nov. 12 I sent you this message that your front page privileges had been revoked.

What Old Prosecutor and Takenoprisoners said to you yesterday is what I've been trying to convey since February -- you inject race into the debate far too often, with the result that no one takes you seriously on the issue anymore and all too often your posts are just complaints or rants that don't provide any real information.  It's extremely disturbing to me when you make assertions that can't be backed up with facts -- that's just not what Left in Alabama should be about.  Our readers trust us.  Different opinions I can understand, but we aren't entitled to our own set of facts.  It's also extremely distressing when front pagers aren't courteous in response to comments.  Unless someone is a known troll, I expect front pagers to have the forbearance and tact to give people the benefit of the doubt about why they're asking a question -- at least the first time.  You've been hitting other commenters hard from the get-go and that's not right -- it keeps people out of the discussion instead of welcoming them. 

I've suspended your front page privileges.  You can still comment and your diaries may still be promoted.  I still believe you have important insights and can contribute a great deal to the community, but what I'm hearing from you lately has not been insightful or positive, just angry, and that's not doing us any good.  If you are interested in having FP privileges reinstated you need to get in touch with me so we can talk this out.  What I said in an earlier message about starting your own blog still goes -- I think it's a good idea and will assist in any way I can.

Believe me, this decision was not taken lightly.  I've agonized over it -- anyone else would have been demoted months ago.  Not that you will believe me, but I don't give a damn who you support for governor. 

You never contacted me.  You still haven't.  If your front page privileges were so important, why didn't you contact me and discuss what would be needed to reinstate them?  You had options, but you chose not to exercise them.  You do not write diaries, you merely snipe from the comments.  You continue to make assertions you can't back up with facts.  

I hate to put all this out in public, but you are the one who keeps bringing this episode up, and implying you were somehow wronged in the process.  You had opportunities to remain a front-pager, but chose not to  exercise them.  Maybe complaining is more fun.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 21:01:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dear mooncat, (0.00 / 0)

Let me see if I've got this right (no pun intended).

My front page priviledges were revoked because;

I was erroneous.

I didn't fact check or use links when possible.

I didn't tone down my outrage.

I didn't respond or contact you by phone or email,

I became to steadily become more outraged and I continued to post assertions not only unsupported by fact, but unsupportable by fact.

You, Old Prosecutor and Takenoprisoners agree I inject race into the debate far too often, with the result that no one takes me seriously on the issue anymore and all too often my posts are just complaints or rants that don't provide any real information, and I make assertions that can't be backed up with facts -- 

I am not courteous in response to comments, I have no tact and I don't give people the benefit of the doubt about why they are asking a question--at least the first time.

I hit other commentors hard from the get go, thereby keeping people out of the discussion instead of welcoming them. 

I didn't contact you. 

On Nov. 4 I posted this diary indicating that a congressional candidate was on the way to Princeton for a fundraiser instead of at the Magic City Classic.

Does that about cover it?

If I agree to not inject race into the coversation, not make assertions that can't be backed up with facts and post links, not become or express outrage, not be erroneous, be courteous, tactful and watch what I say so other commentors will free to post and say what they want to say, and not post diaries indicating a congressional candidate was on the way to a Princton fundraiser instead of the Magic City Classic may I have my front page priviledges back?

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 19:57:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There is no reinstatement (0.00 / 0)

Without contact.  And I make no guarantees even then.  My concerns have not been assuaged by your comments since Nov.  Regardless, your insistence that all contact be done on blog, via comments, is unacceptable.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 09:06:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm glad SOMETHING is going to pass too... (4.00 / 3)

but what's bothered me in this whole thing has been the degree to which no real debate of all points of view was allowed from the very start, first with Democrats, and then, among progressives.

Unlike the far right and the LIVers, I think we all want the President to succeed. Now I never expected in my wildest dreams that single payer would ever pass given all the money PHRMA and Insurance cos. have spent buying up members of Congress for the past 50 years. However, I don't think it was too much to ask that this Congress give those single payer advocates who knocked doors and rang doorbells  for them to regain power, at least the "appearance" of hearing the benefits of their position.

Then there are the legitimate concerns of whether we will be revisiting this issue in a few years, because the insurance cos aren't playing nice again, despite the fresh crop of new customers that will be mandated and subsidized to buy their product. 

I really hope that the passage of this bill moves us forward. But it exposed a lot of faulty wiring in our system that needs to be fixed. Namely, a campaign finance system that allows the some options to be kept completely out of consideration in favor of those that are preferred by the industry

Finally, I hope that we can have discussions about issues like this in the future without screaming at those that have different concerns. We're progressives, so at least we agree that we should actually have a government ;-).

 

 particularly  among some in the progressive community.

"Congress isn't elected by the voters. It's elected by contributors."- Charlie Wilson (as played by Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson's War)

---

by: Dardango @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 21:28:00 PM CDT

scratch that final partial sentence (4.00 / 2)

"Congress isn't elected by the voters. It's elected by contributors."- Charlie Wilson (as played by Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson's War)

---

by: Dardango @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 21:49:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I fucking loved that post! (4.00 / 2)

Just had to get that out of me.

---

by: Almoderate @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 23:48:32 PM CDT

I think we all did! (4.00 / 1)

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead  

---

by: piggieheart @ Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 22:31:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]