Cleo's Mom

DINO = Democrat In Name Only- Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Bart Stupak, etc.. and many of the blue dog democrats. When the republicans keep saying that the democrats have the majority, they forget about these guys, not to mention that the democrats traditionally don't vote like they all share one brain, like the republicans do.

There's a few DINO's in that group, too, that we need to get rid of. To that end a progressive democrat is running against DINO Blanche Lincoln in the primary. I may contribute to his campaign.

If you want to order online try www.womanwithin.com and www.roamans.com both have boots with wide calves - and you can get different calf sizes. Good luck.

Where do people covered through work turn now? Quit their job and buy their own policy? :w00t:

Me, too. I've already joined.

Did you ever see some Catholics, in all sincerity, crawl on their knees for miles, in an act of repentance, to be accepted by God, or say 100 Hail Marys to be forgiven. They just don't understand. It isn't needed. Jesus did it all for us, all we need to do is accept it from him. __________________ They do that as penance for sins. Catholics believe that Jesus gave his disciples (and therefore priests) the powers to forgive or not forgive sins. If the person confesses sins and says a sincere act of contrition, they are forgiven and given a penance.

The Coffee Party Movement (from dailykos) Coffee Party Movement now at 28,000 Sun Feb 28, 2010 at 06:30:25 AM PST In just a few weeks, the movement to counter the Tea Party Movement has grown from an idea of a few progressive friends sitting around talking to 28,000 members and chapters in major cities across the country. If you haven't heard about the Coffee Party Movement, its premise is that government is not the enemy of the people, but rather the collective will of the people, and that our elected representatives should serve us and not lobbyists. Here's the link to the Facebook page that started it all. http://www.facebook.com/... What I find fascinating is that I have friends from all over the political spectrum and one by one they're finding the Coffee Party--and joining the Coffee Party Movment--on Facebook. Some of this movement's founding principles is that they demand civility and reason in all public discourse. Think about it --if reason prevailed, how much wingnuttery would end? For too long, those with deep pockets have used their resources to say that government is bad. Why do they think that governement is bad? They're greedy and it takes their taxes. They're greedy and government makes them honor their civic responsibilities, such as to not pollute, to respect and employ diverse people. They're greedy and government makes them not offshore all business operations to countries that exploit their populations. They're greedy and they don't want to fund parks, schools, trains, etc. Institutions aren't just greedy about money. Religous zealots are greedy for power and suppressing those that are different from them, and they have joined forces with the private sector to exploit the average Joe. Unfortunately, the very people that government is poised to help the most have been convinced via the greed barons of industry and religion that government is bad, inept and interferes with their lives. And government is poised to take one of the two nickels out of their pockets and give it to someone worse off than them. Most people don't realize that 95% of people actually got a tax cut under Obama. The Coffee Party movement in less than a month has five times the supporters of Organizing for America--the relic of the Obama '08 campaign that Plouffe never got off the ground because he was writing/promoting his book. I don't think Tim Kaine is going to save us in '10, but I think the Coffee Party Movement can. What if this movement had existed in August when the town hall shouters were all the rage? (pun intended) Supposedly, there are 110,000 Tea Party supporters in the assorted chapters across the country. If we can get to 28,000 in less than a month, where will be by November? Also, the Coffee Party Movement is made up of some of the most creative and inventive people you'll find--not just astro turfers that Dick Armey hires to come scream and disrupt public meetings. Have you seen the bumper stickers and t-shirt that say, Tea Parties are for little girls with imaginary friends? All of this is so true. We must make sure our country doesn't get hijacked by the party of no and go back to the disastrous policies of the republicans. Been there, done that and living today with the consequences. Their website is: www.coffeepartyusa.com MISSION: The Coffee Party Movement gives voice to Americans who want to see cooperation in government. We recognize that the federal government is not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges that we face as Americans. As voters and grassroots volunteers, we will support leaders who work toward positive solutions, and hold accountable those who obstruct them.

Let's take a look at who the tea partiers are: Posted by Tana Ganeva at 2:22 pm February 17, 2010 REPLIES: 44 Shocking: Tea Partiers Mostly Rich, White, Christian Guys Much like all the founding fathers and most of the Republican party, a whole lot of the Tea Partiers are rich, white, Christian men. According to a new CNN poll (via TPM), a majority of respondents who had donated to a Tea Party group or participated in a Tea Party event were male, white, and identified as Protestant/Other Christian groups. Also, most went to college. 40 percent are college grads, compared to just 28 percent of total poll respondents, and 34 percent have some college. They make a ton more money than the other people interviewed for the study: 34 percent make over $75,000, while 32 make between $50,000 and $75,000. That’s way more than half pulling in over $50,000. So real, genuine Americans seem to be doing pretty well for themselves None of this should be especially surprising. Most poor people scraping by in terrible, lowpaying jobs — or with no jobs — probably don’t have the time to don three-cornered hats and scream about communism. But there has been an MSM tendency to trumpet the movement as an eruption of populist rage by those crushed in the financial crisis. “Populism” liberals just don’t grasp, of course, because they’re all elitist and stuff. Maybe, just maybe, it’s time to reconsider our use of the word “elite” so it at least slightly correlates with things like money and privilage. Some other surprises (column one is Tea Partiers, column two is all respondents):

And being further hypocritical is the fact that the tea partiers say they don't align with any political party while their offices are often in GOP headaquarters. Right! :wink2: These are the people who needed an outlet to vent their anger that Obama won and their guy lost. They found that outlet with the stimulus and then the healthcare debate. That seemed like a legitimate outlet for their anger. They want Obama to fail. They want their ultra right wing extremist candidates to win and they want to undo all the cultural progress and social safety nets we have gained. And to do all this they use catch phrases that have no basis in reality - like: taxed enough already, taking our freedoms away :laugh:, socialism, nazi, communism, etc...

The trifecta of republican's healthcare ideas: 1) start over (translate: kill the bill) 2) buy insurance across state lines 3) tort reform I have already addressed #3. Let's look at #2: the following by Paul Krugman: In reality, House Republicans don't have anything to offer to Americans with troubled medical histories. On the contrary, their big idea -- allowing unrestricted competition across state lines -- would lead to a race to the bottom. The states with the weakest regulations -- for example, those that allow insurance companies to deny coverage to victims of domestic violence -- would set the standards for the nation as a whole. The result would be to afflict the afflicted, to make the lives of Americans with pre-existing conditions even harder. Don't take my word for it. Look at the Congressional Budget Office analysis of the House GOP plan. That analysis is discreetly worded, with the budget office declaring somewhat obscurely that while the number of uninsured Americans wouldn't change much, "the pool of people without health insurance would end up being less healthy, on average, than under current law." Here's the translation: While some people would gain insurance, the people losing insurance would be those who need it most. Under the Republican plan, the American health care system would become even more brutal than it is now.

LM - the republicans have no intention of supporting the healthcare bill regardless of whether it has some of their ideas or not because the democrats and Pres. Obama would get credit for it and they can't let that happen. But if it gets passed and people see it is a good thing, then you'll see they hypocritical republicans trying to get credit for it, even though they voted against it. They did this with the stimulus.

Almost that long for me too. LOL. But it worked. Now I just have to go delete over 1000 emails!!

This is so true, BJean. And anytime the republicans speak of fiscal responsibility it means they are trying to save money on the backs of the least among us. I have posted about this elsewhere - it's called "Starve the Beast.". Republicans never advocate that we cut defense spending or corporate welfare. Oh, no. Let's just not extend unemployment benefits. Or let's not provide health insurance to the uninsured. And the list goes on. But many of those who are directly affected by the cold-hearted, mean-spirited economic agenda of republicans vote for them. Why? Because they are pro-gun, anti-gay and anti-abortion. Try feeding your family with that.

I'm positive that the unemployed want their benefits and COBRA extended, and I think most Americans support this, too. If you can find anything to dispute this, then post it. :cursing:

The hypocrisy that republicans actually care about the average middle class person: Jim Bunning, a Republican from Kentucky, is single-handedly blocking Senate action needed to prevent an estimated 1.2 million American workers from prematurely losing their unemployment benefits next month. As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along. And when Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) begged him to drop his objection, Politico reports, Bunning replied: "Tough shit." Bunning says he doesn't oppose extending benefits -- he just doesn't want the money that's required added to the deficit. He proposes paying for the 30-day extension with stimulus funds. The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections. And at one point during the debate, which dragged on till nearly midnight, Bunning complained of missing a basketball game. "I have missed the Kentucky-South Carolina game that started at 9:00," (Oh, boo hoo):cursing: he said, "and it's the only redeeming chance we had to beat South Carolina since they're the only team that has beat Kentucky this year. So, he cares more about a basketball game than he does about unemployed people who are soon to lose their benefits.

Thank you. I did it. Now I'll have to see if it works. Thanks,again.

The New York Times By TOM BAKER Published: July 11, 2009 OUR medical liability system needs reform. But anyone who thinks that limiting liability would reduce health care costs is fooling himself. Preventable medical injuries, not patient compensation, are what ring up extra costs for additional treatment. This means taxpayers, employers and everyone else who buys health insurance — all of us — have a big stake in patient safety. Eighty percent of malpractice claims involve significant disability or death, a 2006 analysis of medical malpractice claims conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health shows, and the amount of compensation patients receive strongly depends on the merits of their claims. Most people injured by medical malpractice do not bring legal claims, earlier studies by the same researchers have found. On the other hand, medical liability has improved patient safety — by leading hospitals to hire risk managers, for example, and spurring anesthesiologists to improve their safety standards and practices. Even medical societies’ efforts to attack the liability system have helped, by inspiring the research that has documented the surprising extent of preventable injuries in hospitals. That research helped start the patient safety movement. When it comes to rising medical costs, liability is a symptom, not the disease. Getting rid of liability might save money for hospitals and some high-risk specialists, but it would cost society more by taking away one of the few hard-wired patient safety incentives. Besides, there’s a better answer for doctors worried about high malpractice insurance premiums. Critics point to defensive medicine as the hidden burden that liability imposes on health care. Yet research shows that while the fear of liability changes doctors’ behavior, that isn’t necessarily a burden. Some defensive medicine is, like defensive driving, good practice. Too often, we can’t distinguish between treatments that are necessary and those that are wasteful. Better research on what works and what doesn’t — evidence-based medicine — will help. And it will address the more general challenge of avoiding costly but unnecessary care. Just as we need evidence-based medicine, we also need evidence-based medical liability reform. The research shows, overwhelmingly, that the real problem is too much malpractice, not too many malpractice lawsuits. So medical providers should be required to disclose injuries, provide quicker compensation to deserving patients and — here’s the answer for doctors worried about their premiums — shift the responsibility for buying malpractice insurance to hospitals and other large medical institutions. Evidence-based liability reform would give these institutions the incentive they need to cut back on the most wasteful aspect of American health care: preventable medical injuries. LM - you're absolutely right - any "savings" would go right into the pocket of insurance companies not reduction in costs to consumers.

I already set the default thread in the subscription mode to "no email notifications" but I am still getting them. How can I stop getting them?

Too funny. That fuzzy math implies that every man, woman and child would now buy their health insurance across state lines, when in reality, most people get their health insurance from their employers and have very little say, if any, as to where it's bought. Not to mention a family policy covers all members so it wouldn't be 301 million.

Said at today's healthcare summit: "If you think it's a socialist plot, then please drop out of the federal employees health program". (Dick Durbin) Way to stick it to 'em, Durbin!!

You know what pattygreen? You are just an elitist snob who looks down on those who are less fortunate than you. You forget your roots in doing so, too. And don't give me your "I worked hard, paid my bills, went to school, blah, blah, blah," speech. We've all heard it and it doesn't change a thing. Maybe some abuse the system but many are trying to better themselves, too. You advocate for wall street, big corporations and the insurance industry. When you talk about making people dependent and viciously attack welfare, you never rant about corporate welfare and all the free tax money they get. You criticize the welfare recipient who has cable tv but not the corporate welfare CEO who gets a $100 million bonus with our money. You oppose main street, middle class and poor people. Pres. Obama's stimulus has been proven to work. It was given to people to keep or create jobs. These people worked for these funds and they paid taxes, etc.. The stimulus kept our economy from complete collapse and from a full blown depression. I am so thankful we had Pres. Obama at the helm for this economic situation. The bank bailouts were started by bush. Did he want people to go on welfare and become dependent on the government by giving our money to banks who made bad decisions? The healthcare plan will reduce the deficit. It will help our economy by reining in HC costs. People who don't have insurance and can't afford it will be helped by the government to purchase it. You obviously don't care about people who can't afford to purchase health insurance but don't qualify for medicaid. I do. Tax credits for homebuyers and clunkers helps to stimulate the economy. Ask the home builders, realtors or car salespeople. Our economy needed to be stimulated. When it is, it makes the economy healthier and people who get jobs from it buy things and pay taxes. Additionally, I notice that you never take exception to all the tax breaks big corporations get. Our tax money. Oh no. Maybe some token lip service but you rail against anything that goes to your neighbor. None of these things makes Pres. Obama a president who wants more people on welfare and to be dependent on the government. That's just more right wing extremist BS to which you subscribe. It makes him a president who wants to solve the tough problems. And I'm glad he is tough enough and smart enough to try to solve them instead of ignoring them, which would be the easy way out.

from pattygreen:That cartoon doesn't suggest any of those points. Only to someone like you who can't think outside of race. I saw that cartoon, and the color of Obama was not even an issue to me when I saw it. I knew right away that the cartoon reflected a president who likes to give away our hard earned money to those who don't work. You on the other hand just HAD to see it as a racial dig. That shows me how hooked you are on the color of peoples skin. Too bad for you. I feel sorry for you. Save me your phoney sympathy. It's as phoney as all the teabaggers and their "outrage" about spending and the deficit.

Please provide video links where Pres. Obama says that he wants more people to go on welfare, line up for giveaways and handouts (btw, what are these free giveaways and handouts, because I might want to get in line? :smile2:), and where he says that he doesn't want people working or starting up new businesses or going to school/college or becoming better educated and earning a living.

Pres. Obama's picture on food stamps implies many things: 1) those who voted for Obama are on food stamps 2) Pres. Obama has increased the numbers on food stamps 3) black people are on food stamps to a greater degree than white people. The truth of the matter is that more white people are on welfare than black people. And since the unemployment has risen, the need for food stamps has risen, too. Many hard working families are now depending on food stamps to feed their family and keep their kids from going hungry. I fail to find the humor in that situation, but remember, the right wingers claim they aren't mean spiritied or cold hearted or hateful. However, I think this post proves that they are. :smile2:

Patty - you should have posted that Obama bashing post on the Obama thread, but since you posted it here, I will ask you: Whose picture was on food stamps when you used them?