Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“We compromised on single payer by backing a public option, and now we are being asked to compromise the public option with negotiated rates. In conference, we will likely be asked to compromise negotiated rates with a trigger. In each and every step of the health care debate, the insurance companies have won. If they get hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxpayer subsidies, they get to raise their premiums, and increase their co pays and deductibles, while the public is forced to pay for private insurance, then the insurance companies win big.
“If this is the best we can do, then it is time to ask ourselves whether the two-party system is truly capable of representing the American people or whether the system has been so compromised by special interests that we can’t even protect the health of our own people. This is a moment of truth for the Democratic Party. Will we stand for the people or the insurance companies?”
Democrats in Alabama can be more conservative than some Republicans in California. Which means, being a Democrat or Republican does not tell you what their principles - applied nationally - are. It just tells you, at a state level, one is to the left and the other to the right. More real alternatives (at least one or two) are probably needed at the grassroots level. I am ignoring the Greens / Libertarian candidates as all of them want to start at the top being a President and that is never going to happen anytime soon.
I'd say lobbyist ruined this country far more than the two party system.
The lobbyists and the representatives that they own, which is sadly many on both sides of the aisle. Without campaign finance reform, what chance do we have to get some of these career politicians out of government. Which party would stand a chance when up aganst the money of the corporations?
I like that Cucinich...when he uses the term "we"...
"We "to him are the "progressives ",socialists,
the Progressive Caucus,together with the Black Caucus in the House,
total 100 Reps & some 30 Senators,
on behalf of 20-25% of the people...
“We compromised on single payer by backing a public option, and now we are being asked to compromise the public option with negotiated rates. In conference, we will likely be asked to compromise negotiated rates with a trigger. In each and every step of the health care debate, the insurance companies have won. If they get hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxpayer subsidies, they get to raise their premiums, and increase their co pays and deductibles, while the public is forced to pay for private insurance, then the insurance companies win big.
“If this is the best we can do, then it is time to ask ourselves whether the two-party system is truly capable of representing the American people or whether the system has been so compromised by special interests that we can’t even protect the health of our own people. This is a moment of truth for the Democratic Party. Will we stand for the people or the insurance companies?”
“We compromised on single payer by backing a public option, and now we are being asked to compromise the public option with negotiated rates. In conference, we will likely be asked to compromise negotiated rates with a trigger. In each and every step of the health care debate, the insurance companies have won. If they get hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxpayer subsidies, they get to raise their premiums, and increase their co pays and deductibles, while the public is forced to pay for private insurance, then the insurance companies win big.
“If this is the best we can do, then it is time to ask ourselves whether the two-party system is truly capable of representing the American people or whether the system has been so compromised by special interests that we can’t even protect the health of our own people. This is a moment of truth for the Democratic Party. Will we stand for the people or the insurance companies?”
Are you and Kucinich saying that a multiple party system would be better than two party? It sounds that way so let me explain why I don't like a multi-party system. You know like the French or even the British. If we had such a system it would have to come at the expense of our Presidential system. With three equally balanced parties everything would have to be done with coalitions. That may work but every issue would take a new coalition and nobody could be the enemy of the others since they all need each other.
Do you fail to see that we couldn't elect a President that way. The Constitution would have to be amended for that election process. Then every time a sever change over any amount of time would require a new President. Therefore, we would have to switch a Parliamentary system.
Make the switch but please wait until I am no longer around to detest that system of government.
Isn't the solution obvious? If the two-party system doesn't work, we need more parties! I can't recall reading anything about an effort to prevent the establishment of more political parties. As a matter of fact, I believe that there already are others, besides the Democrats and Republicans. If enough people feel that we need more choices than "D" and "R" on election day, how about casting votes elsewhere...or is that just too simplistic?
As to the Constitution, does it really specify two parties? That sounds peculiar, especially since at the time of ratification, there weren't any organized parties.
Isn't the solution obvious? If the two-party system doesn't work, we need more parties! I can't recall reading anything about an effort to prevent the establishment of more political parties. As a matter of fact, I believe that there already are others, besides the Democrats and Republicans. If enough people feel that we need more choices than "D" and "R" on election day, how about casting votes elsewhere...or is that just too simplistic?
As to the Constitution, does it really specify two parties? That sounds peculiar, especially since at the time of ratification, there weren't any organized parties.
Of course there are other parties. The problem is that the money supporting these damn career representatives is knocking the competition out of the game. Corporate owned media knocked Kucinich out of one of the major Presidential debates on some kind of nonsensical technicality. Kucinich is way to progressive and honest for them. He had the courage to have introduced 35 articles of impeachment on the Senate floor against Bush. We are being sold down the river and the appalling thing is that many Americans are fighting to keep corporate monopolies in charge. Joe "turncoat" Lieberman has a wife that is a lobbyist...is that not a conflict of interests or what? Which way will Lieberman vote on an issue? For the people or to line his and his wife's pockets?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.