Democrats & Liberals Archives

The Dead Well and the Ongoing Quest for Sanity in American Policy

The Macondo Well is officially dead, it’s wellbore filled with cement. Funny thing about the name Macondo is it comes from Latin American author Gabriel García Márquez’s novel One Hundred Years of Solitude. It refers to a town that in the novel is struck by the strangest of plagues: a five year period of sleeplessness, during which reality slips away, dreams leak into reality, and everybody becomes completely forgetful. Did something else come up through that well than just oil?

I'm only speaking figuratively, but for my part, this country seems strange nowadays. Folks adorn magazine covers whose only qualification for being famous seems to be good press agents. Reality TV presents us with people who seem like surreal cariactures of normal folks, without the excuse of the show being fiction to justify their outlandish behavior and personalities.

The Macondo Well Blowout seems to have slipped from national attention. I'd like to think people remembered it. I would like to think we're not so caught up in a dream world of soap-opera-ish conflict chasing that we don't recognize that sometimes things boil down to necessary action.

The smart, sane thing to do would be to reform the process for permitting and overseeing the drilling of oil both in deepwater and shallow. We've been given plenty of reason here. Even if this kind of accident is rare, it's the kind of accident that we can't afford to happen much more than once. Some may reassure themselves that the environment can handle the pollution, but even if it can, what's the point of tempting fate by allowing this to happen again?

I know some will say, ask Obama to act. Well, he has, but there are limits to what a man whose job is to execute the law, not write it, can do. Congress has to act, too.

In times of sanity, Congress would act. The political pressure would be enormous to act. And it is enormous. But there seems to be a disconnect.

We have a process in the legislature that is crippled by an ad hoc requirement of sixty votes to pass important legislation, wielded by a party whose members actually criticized the government for seeking damages on behalf of fishermen and tourist operators for one of the worst environmental disasters in American history. It's been called a shakedown. It's extortion now to extract damages for the destruction of people's livelihood? Joe Barton's infamous apology to BP highlights this strange attitude, that somehow it's unseemly to ask big business to compensate people for damages their misbehavior caused to other industries and businesses.

We look at the catastrophe on Wall Street, and we see the same sort of protective attitude. It's obvious something went terribly wrong, but the GOP is still willing to act as if the biggest threat we face is the uncertainty of how the businesses will make money if folks regulate more strictly. Big government once again gets dragged out as the bad guy, despite the fact that Wall Street wrote its own rules for the past decade, and failed to right ones that would deliver a sustainable market. Why, pray tell, are we trusting them to do now what they failed to do before?

Over my lifetime, I've seen the market repeatedly fail to police itself. I've seen the junk-bond market collapse, and the stockbrokers go to jail for insider trading over it. I've seen the Savings and Loan Thrifts go under beneath the weight of their own real estate speculation, with the Resolution Trust Authority spending tens of billions of dollars to resolve that economic screw up. Twelve years ago, the derivatives market almost imploded the way it did ten years later, as the failure of one outfit's derivative bets threatened to ensnare all the other banks in its collapse.

Those who spoke up and said that derivatives should be regulated were shut up and marginalized after that. After that! We saw Enron, both manipulating its investors, and manipulating consumers in California's energy market, deliberately manipulating supply to extort higher costs from California and its consumers, and manipulting its investors to make it's certifiably bugnuts business model look like a profit center.

Despite all this, a literal history of corruption of the markets, the failure of those markets to prevent catastrophic crashes in the face of one bit of corporate malfeasance after another, some still take a very permissive attitude towards what business interests can do.

Even now, because of Republican Obstruction and the unfortunate cooperation of some Democrats, it's been difficult to put through common sense regulation. It has all the symptoms to me of a system so thoroughly corrupted that people are afraid of beginning the process of redeeming it, for the fear that the revelations that an honest accounting might bring would cause a disaster in and of itself.

Are we to be a nation that survives on the concealment of dirty little secrets? What nation can actually survive on that? If our best response to the chicanery of the banks and the investment firms is to gingerly step around them, as if government were a porcupine and they were balloons, then all we're really doing is letting the problem fester so somebody can take the blame for the problems that inevitable disclosure would bring.

One damn mess after another, deferred. I wish to take people aside and say, "you don't want to pass on messes to your children? How about the fracking for Shale gas extraction? How about that mess on the gulf coast. Will you be around to hold your kids hands when they have to face another crippling economic downturn brought on by somebody's bad derivatives bet, and all the market manipulation they felt necessary to make themselves money? Do you want them sent overseas to another war because their foreign policy people have itchy trigger-fingers? Are you going to leave them with more animosity between them and the Muslim world, with more alienation from our European allies? And what about their healthcare costs? And if you're really serious about dealing with that deficit problem, why the hell are you prepared to let Republicans get in and double that potential debt for the profit of just two percent of all Americans?"

I know why people are just keeping their heads down, working hard, and not feeling they should push anything here. I know why they're disappointed, and what they wished for. But I'm here to tell you, and tell them this: none of this gets better if we go back to the way we were doing things. There are some who wish to make you fear this unknown frontier to shun change for the sake of gentle, comforting illusion.

But really, look at your situation people. Do you think an industry that was so slipshod as to let something like the Macondo event happen is going to actually fix its behavior? BP's had several other major accidents, including a refinery explosion and pipe leak. We have to realize that in the short run, it's cheaper to pay for a lot of ads and do a crapload of public relations hooey to lull people back into complacency than it is to really fix the problems long term. Modern business's reliance on sophisticated modern communications essentially guarantees that folks in corporate America will put the emphasis on crafting a BS message to calm anger, rather than the messy, problematic business of undoing years of policy and actually taking care of the millions, even billions in costs it will take to actually resolve mechanical and infrastructural problems.

It's cheaper to talk people out of following through on holding you accountable than it is to actually do what it takes to resolve all the mistakes and reform all the dysfunctional corporate structures. Businesses will tend to do what's cheaper. They will jaw-jaw rather than fix-fix.

That is why we need government. They are the only folks who can tell these people that they have no choice. but to straighten up and fly right. By ourselves, we cannot force them on this. Boycotts will not force reform on BP. Goldman Sachs will continue to sell its customers "s***ty deals", until they know they can't get away with it. Oil and gas companies will continue to pollute and cause needless, devastating accidents and just try to PR themselves out of the doghouse, until the law comes along and simply tells them they can't pull this crap any longer.

This is not communism or socialism I'm suggestion. This is not class warfare or anything else like that. This is common sense and sanity. This is America having the clarity of thought to recognize that when bad behavior hurts society as whole, especially profitable bad behavior, it makes no sense to just let the status quo persist.

Somebody must lay down the law.

But will it be Congress any time soon?

America's constitution does not require that every bill going through the Senate pass by sixty votes, but it does require that any bill that arrives on the President's desk to be signed into law must pass both houses. It also lets Congress write its own rules in both houses. Current senate policy does not actually require sixty votes for a bill to pass. It does require sixty votes if somebody threatens a filibuster, however, to end debate on that bill.

Congress will not pass the legislation need, at the quality needed in order to face American's problems because Republicans are talking every bill of any consequences to death each and every time, every Senator being required to vote no on cloture on their side under threat of losing their position in the power structure of the Senate GOP. Republicans are treating this as a heroic thing they're doing, but they're forgetting that Americans deliberately voted them out of power beforehand. What's more, Republicans started this before their positions were popular. They started this with a mind to make these actions popular, legitimize them after the fact.

Republicans did this so that Democrats could take the flack for the problems they prevented from being solved, or even addressed. What angers me is that Democrats weren't given a chance to fail on their own, but were instead hobbled by an abuse of procedural rules in the Senate unlike anything any observer has ever seen before.

Republicans were more than given their fair chance to succeed, and they failed on their policies lack of merit. We saw the disasters that came of their imposition of their ideology on the system. Democrats have not even been given the chance to execute their policies before the Republicans started claiming that everything would go to hell. Well, I'll tell them here: you've already put this country in hell. The question is, when do you folks stop acting simply to cover your political asses, and leave behind your tattered legacy of infamous policy decisions, and when do you start helping to improve the fortunes of this country, rather than just he fortunes of your party in this electionj? When does this country, and the fit of our policy to the reallities it faces become more important than beating Democrats or destroying Obama?

If folks wonder why I'm so harsh with Republicans nowadays, it's because the folks leading them in this party not only seem to be learning nothing, but to justify what they did before, they're doubling down on all the questionable things they did before.

There's got to be a stopping point for this insanity somewhere, this refusal to face the fact that markets can't police themselves anymore than cities can, that we can't trust some people to do the right thing without requiring it of them by law. We've go to put more reality and less theory into how we set our policy, and whoever takes Congress this fall, nobody will be spared from the consequences of our failure to make that fit appropriately. Question is, will those of you on the right allow your party to stumble into the darkness of forgetfullness, of obliviousness, and just let the terrible status quo persist, or will your party finally live up to its responsibilities to the American people to help govern, and govern well?

Posted by Stephen Daugherty at September 19, 2010 3:20 PM
Comments
Comment #308849

Stephen,

You talk funny. Conservatives don’t think. They ‘win’. When they ‘win’ they don’t have to think. Remember? Hardly. Remembering takes guts and hard work. Conservatives are too busy ‘winning’ to worry about consequences.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 19, 2010 5:58 PM
Comment #308856

Marysdude-
They sometimes win. Sometimes, though, they collapse like a demolished building under the weight of whatever political excess they have going on.

I sometimes feel Republicans are as you say, that conservatives are, as you say, but I remember what the conservatives I knew at Baylor were like. I remember back in the days when the Republicans didn’t feel they had to keep the dummies and the madmen in power in order to avoid all out catastrophe.

9/11, I think, poisoned the party in some way, as Rove and the other people turned it into a license to make every political conflict an end of the world conflict they had to win. Nice way to motivate people, make sure they voted for the party, went activist for you among others. But it locked them into a narrative where they couldn’t step back and see their own actions from the outside without betraying the cause, and thereby themselves.

When you set people down that narrow path, it can blind them to both the merits of other people’s arguments, and the merits of other people, period. I can understand your dislike for what conservatives have become, but I would much prefer that something happen to sow peace between the different sides of this argument so we can stop taking politics and making melodrama out of it.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 19, 2010 7:32 PM
Comment #308867

Stephen

Life is just one mess after another. Yesterday’s solution is today’s problem and I expect many of our solutions will become problems for our kids.

Conservatives can play this game too. We can claim, with great justification, that conservative policies never had the kinds of super majorities Democrats have now, that there never was a “true” chance. It is BS when liberals do it and BS when conservatives do it. The only difference is we tend to know it, while you guys … well don’t.

Robert Kennedy made a good rhetorical point but was stupidly expressing liberalism when he said, “There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why… I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” Of course, being a Kennedy he was well aware of how to play real world politics and never expected to achieve what others promised for him.

It is nearly impossible to argue against the sentiment, however, but we all know that liberalism doesn’t produce the results you talk about. Obama is president and he enjoyed greater majorities than ANY conservative has had in living memory. Yet he doesn’t do what you want. Maybe it is time to answer the “why not?” question by explaining that in human events perfection doesn’t happen.

BTW - re Obama - I had nothing much against him and was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But he really messed up quickly. I really cannot hope he succeeds in making government bigger and more intrusive. And it looks like a majority of Americans are equally troubled by this and his apparent lack of experience. IMO, there is a good chance he will be a one-term guy.

Posted by: C&J at September 19, 2010 9:08 PM
Comment #308871

Marysdude,
Not wanting to start a war, the Conservatives do think; however, they think in a defferent way than todays’ Liberals. And why that may seem like a problem given the crossroads at Trickledown and Trickle-up, IMHO it reflects back to the 60’s and 70’s when Americans had to decide if the Institutions or the Private Sector would lead the way to the 21st Century.

But today, it seems that some on both sides want to make the debate between the Individual Have and Have Not instead of the role of government and commerce working together to build a beter world for everyone. For why we should keep in mind that government can’t do everything so can the same thng be said (and proven) that the private sector lacks the self-education and self-knowledge to be everything to everybody.

And though I can say with complete certiany the Children of the 70’s lacks the self-control and self-knowledge to lead the Children of the 21st Century down the road to self-economic viability and financial independence. Without fear or limits I do know the Children of the 21st Century can learn from their parents trip on Trickledown road to avoid the same mistakes on their journey on Trickle-up.

So why the American Voter (both Old and Young) will need to ask themselves if their candidate or incumbent in 2010 are ready to embrace the 21st Century freely or like Senator DeMint do everything in their power to include going against their own citizens best interest in order to force Americans to continue down the path of Trickledown. Therefore, IMHO all Americans should ask those running for office, the Main Stream Media, and their supporters during the next month is simply.

Regardless of political party, personal beliefs, or their personal agenda, do they have a vision for America and the Free World which will lead to a Better World?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 19, 2010 9:51 PM
Comment #308881

Henry,

I respect the question you pose, but you mustn’t expect a rational response from conservatives…they have little usable rationale. How rational is it to continue the same policies that ruined America, and expect a better result, just because they somehow dream that it will work THIS time?

Stephen,

You read the posts here. Have you witnessed anything lately that hints to compromise in the future? It has become there way or the highway. And, it’s not just here, it encompasses corporations and right-wing politics. Our future as Americans is indeed in dire straights. Much like the way we were lied and fooled into a dishonorable invasion of Iraq, conservatives have been lied to and fooled into believing this stupidity will somehow work. They cannot compromise because they cannot see. They have been blinded by the light…the light of ‘win’. That their are consequences to ‘winning’ never seems to cross what little is left of their minds.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 20, 2010 12:15 AM
Comment #308888

Marysdude,
I suppose if one only listens to Rush and Company to form their opinion about Conservatives and the Republican Party than they would walk away believing nothing can be done to have a rational conversation; however, like Liberals and the Democratic Party (especially in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s) believed “The Man” was out to get them so can be said today their Loyal Opposition believes “The Man” is out to get them. And though this leads to conflict both inside and outside the two political parties. I do remember in the 1990’s some on the Left did the same thing those on the Right are doing right now. So, let me propose to you a question that goes against both political parties core beliefs since it seems neither will or want to accept the reality of the other.

McDowell stated this weekend that it is when people fear the government that is tranny, but when the government fears the people that is liberty. Well, she may be entitled to her opinion especially if one believes in the idea the Elite (Kings and Queens) eule the Land. But this is America and dispite our flaws the Government is By, For, and Of We the People. Thus, IMHO is why the Elders of the 70’s claimed during the Debate of Enlightenment All Citizens are Corporations and are subject to the same rules and regulations. Therefore, can one say the Government of America (and IMHO the World) wants Liberty or Tranny?

Well, politically speaking Americans ( and IMHO most Humans) want both to exists in the same reality. For as an Individual, Group, Community, Tribe, and so on Parents want to believe they are going right by their children just like most Corporations believe they are doing right by their Stockholders. And if anyone wants to tell them differently than “Houston, we have a problem.”

For example; the oil companies believe they are being responsible and are acting in the best unterest of their stockholders; nonetheless, how can one say they are acting in the best interest of their stovkholders when by the very nature of the business leads to the willful destuction of the resource making them profit?

Hence a parental diliema, for in the short term (the parents’ lifetime) the burning of oil in order to supply the world with a set of products for energy, transportation, and useage from a-z makes sense considering the knowledge passed down from their parents. Nonetheless, told and now experiencing first hand the linited ability of a finite resource is it in the best interest of ‘We the Corporation” to continue down the same path as our parents or the stockholders of tommorrow?

Well, like Americans in the 70’s was forced to switch from leaded fuel to unleaded fuel so now today’s Americans are being forced to change from fossil fuel to electricity in order to power their cars. So in a manner of speaking one could claim Liberty or Tranny even though looking at the long term (a childs’ lifetime) it is in the best interest to create a solution today in order to avoid the problems faced by long gas lines and higher prices just as those who lived in the 70’s did.

However, able politically to go beyond the short and long term interests and views held by the Liberals and Conservatives in both political parties cannot one look at the problem as one of enlightenment and thus act in the best interest of all Parents/Dtockholders (past, future, and present) by utilizing the powers of We the People/Corporation to preserve the finite resource of oil and allow/encourage present day oil companies to seek alternative methods of making a profit?

Granted, the idea would require both political parties/parents to agree and create a plan on the best way to pull off the change; nevertheless, having the format on how it was done in the 70’s/80’s one should realize the advantages of figuring out how Individuals/Coepoearions can cut costs and prosper from such action as well as help nature by creating a Green Environment and income for the individual/corporation.

Thus, it may seem like one must travel down the same path as their parents and civil leaders in order to go forward. In reality forcing Americans today to make the transition from gasoline to electric vehicles cannot only help the Corporation become Energy and Economically Independent (Tranny), but provide the Individual the Liberty of knowing they do not have to depend upon the Government or “The Man” for their everyday life expenses.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 20, 2010 5:19 AM
Comment #308901

Speaking of sanity in America (trying but failing to stay on thread), I understand that ‘Citizens United’ has readied to throw a blow for Democracy (tongue-in-cheek). A group calling itself ‘60 Plus Association’ has pledged $600,000.00 into the pot to unseat just one Democrat, Representative Alan Grayson.

‘60 Plus Association’ is a front for the Pharmaceutical Industry. Two thirds of a million just this one time for just one race. Can you just imagine what this election year is going to look like when the dust (corporate dollar) settles?

We sane people bow to your wisdom SCOTUS…er…we kneel to your holyness…er…we are on bended knee, begging for a retraction of Citizens United!

Posted by: Marysdude at September 20, 2010 1:29 PM
Comment #308902

Well, dude, I guess all the speculation on the effects of the SCOTUS taking on a human persona has become reality. That’s just one contribution from the very deep pockets of that once revered establishment.

Monday, March 05, 2007
An essay on access and corruption in US politics

“Money buys access; access begets influence. It is as close to a textbook definition of corruption as you can get - but it’s still legal.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2026757,00.html

We should all be so proud of where we are today….well, maybe only if we are part of the right-wing nutography !

Posted by: jane doe at September 20, 2010 2:48 PM
Comment #308904

Isn’t Alan Grayson, that crazy congressman from Florida? I’m not surprised that the 60 plus generation wants to get rid of him. He is an embarrassment to Florida.

Posted by: Kathy at September 20, 2010 3:24 PM
Comment #308905

You mean these people?

In 2001, 60 Plus received a total of $275,000 from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the group Citizens for Better Medicare, itself largely supported by the pharmaceutical industry, and three drug companies (Merck, Pfizer and Wyeth-Ayerst) plus another $300,000 from Hanwha International Corp., the U.S. subsidiary of a Korean conglomerate with chemical and pharmaceutical interests—amounts that made up about 29 percent of its revenue. “We’re not a front for anybody,” James L. Martin, the chairman of 60 Plus, told the AARP Bulletin. “I get money from lots of sources. I’ve received money from the pharmaceuticals—I wish it was more.” [11] 60 Plus does not provide any explanation of its funding on its website. [12]

In 2003, President Jim Martin told the British Medical Journal that 60 Plus had 225,000 members, whom he would not disclose for privacy purposes. However, according to the organization’s IRS Form 990, 91 percent of its $11 million in 2002 revenue came from one undisclosed source. The Public Citizen watchdog group suspects that the pharmaceutical industry was that source. [13] According to the Washington Post, in 2002, 60 Plus received an unrestricted educational grant (which can be used as most needed) from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America[14] As recently as 2001, 60 Plus has not reported any member dues as revenue on its past tax returns, reported the AARP Bulletin.[15]

60 Plus also earns income from sponsoring life insurance and health screening for its members. [16]

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 20, 2010 3:57 PM
Comment #308908

Just a refresher on who we are up against. (deep sigh) !


http://www.suite101.com/content/right-wing-authoritarianism-a61455

Posted by: jane doe at September 20, 2010 4:52 PM
Comment #308909

Again about sanity v. insanity:

John McCain, American hero, has said that he intends to stop the vote against ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ from coming up for vote, and failing that, will filibuster.

I called his office, but due to heavy phone traffic was not able to use his voice mail service, so i sent the following email to his Senate office. It is totally insane to pretend any longer that gays and lesbians are second class citizens.

>It is time for ALL Americans to have their civil rights. Gay’s nor lesbian’s can ever be real citizens as long as bigoted folks hold them back. The time is NOW to kill the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ stupidity. Republicans should be out in front on this issue, not dragging their feet. Individual rights are not reserved for conservatives only. You served with them, John, it is time to recognize their value.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 20, 2010 5:04 PM
Comment #308910

Way to go, dude!!

Posted by: jane doe at September 20, 2010 5:15 PM
Comment #308913


>Isn’t Alan Grayson, that crazy congressman from Florida? I’m not surprised that the 60 plus generation wants to get rid of him. He is an embarrassment to Florida.
Posted by: Kathy at September 20, 2010 03:24 PM

Kathy,

Even were we to believe that what you say about Grayson is true, do you think it a good thing for it to be the Pharmaceutical Industry that takes him out of office? Is that really what you want in America? The ‘60 Plus Association is an arm of big Pharma.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 20, 2010 5:52 PM
Comment #308919

Dude, I can’t speak for Kathy, but I will say that the Republicans and Tea-drinkers do seem extraordinarily fond of their Big Pharma pals.

Perhaps that deep and self-sacrificing love has something to do with why these folks have always screamed whenever people on left talk about how wrong it is for these corporations to use taxpayer dollars to help fund important portions of their research, and then turn around and gouge us for the cost of those products when we’re in the midst of being sick and/or dying?

As for Grayson, I think he’s honest and I really wish there were more like him up on that Hill. But because he calls things exactly as he sees them, it’s the GOP that is driven completely crazy.

One good example:

Grayson:

“The Republican Health care plan for America: Don’t get sick. If you have insurance, don’t get sick. If you don’t have insurance, don’t get sick. If you’re sick, don’t get sick… Republicans have a backup plan in case you do get sick. If you get sick America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly.”

The GOP freaked over for his being too starkly honest about their callousness and of course they demanded that he give them an apology.

So Grayson obligingly got up and gave an apology:

“I apologize to the dead and their families that we haven’t acted sooner to end this holocaust in America.”

Unfortunately, the health care bill didn’t do much, and since the GOP has said they plan to do away with it entirely in the event they win in November, it appears that their Die Quickly Health Care Plan is still very much in place.

Btw, Allen Grayson has a website called Names of the Dead. On this site people can share the story of how their family members and loved ones died simply because they didn’t have any health insurance.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 20, 2010 8:07 PM
Comment #308924

We could use a few more Allen Graysons. A Democrat with the stones to tell the truth.

Posted by: Jeff at September 20, 2010 9:37 PM
Comment #308929

Kathy,
Did you ever think the reason the 60 Plus generation wants to get rid of Alan Grayson is because he is does not fear them? In fact, if more Democrats had the courage to stand up to the 20th Century Status Quo than the problem with Healthcare could be solved overnight. For imagine if Congress would restrict Elderly Care to the why this age group treated their parents and grandparents. Care to say the 60 plus group would not be screaming as their entitlements where lower to the level of care which allowed limited rest homes, cur=t pay for doctors and medical staff, as well as discontinueing home care and all the other programs seniors enjoy today.

For if one is looking to cut the budget and debt than what better way than cut the nedical care and retirement benefits to the generation who has spent us into the economic problems we face.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 20, 2010 10:57 PM
Comment #308933

Henry,

I’m sorry, but you have taken the ‘60 Plus Association’ at their word as to who they are. It is NOT a bunch of old folks like members of AARP. The ‘60 Plus’ group is just a name big Pharma uses to front money to political enemies of sanity and reason. The office at ‘60 Plus Association’ is virtually empty. There are only enough people there to accept checks from Pharmaceutical companies, and redistribute it to their special interest protagonists.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 20, 2010 11:29 PM
Comment #308938

Marysdude,
Why one can make the case “Everything is in a Name” I do believe that big Phama has enough Old Folks to realize that if we decide to limit how much Health and Medical Care the Elderly will recieve over the next 10-20 years that most of them will be out of business and than the Children of the 21st Century will not be burdened by the Baby Boomers.

For just as we have worked together as a nation and a society to extend the life of our citizens over the last 30 years. Who is to say that the Children of the 70’s and 21st Century has to allow our government and society to spend the money on those over the age of 60?

Because why the big Phama can cry about compassion for Elderly Care, the fact still remains that those currently over the age of 60 decided some 40 years ago that it would be better to spend Americas’ Limited Funds on R&D instead of improving the living standards of their parents and grandparents. Thus, one could make the case that today’s elderly should have no better treatment than they gave their eledrly and that the limited funds available should be put into R&D at our Institutions.

Thus,why it would be a hard pill for the Youth of Today I do believe if Alan Grayson and the other Democrats would look back to our political history in the 60’s and 70’s they could develope an argument which would create the conditions for big Phama to take another look at who they want to support and who they want to defeat. Since it is not the Democratic Party who is calling for the elimination or strong reduction in Medi-Care.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 21, 2010 12:18 AM
Comment #308943

Henry,

Yeah, but it is Democrats who want to make all governmental purchases of their products price negotiable.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 21, 2010 6:59 AM
Comment #308949

Marysdude,
Though the Democrats are interested in making prices negotiable, isn’t it the Conservatives who want to limit big Phama profits by reducing benefits for most Americans? A slight difference of opinion; nevertheless, one that will have great affect on the bottom line of big Phama if the Republicans are allowed to returm to power.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 21, 2010 8:42 AM
Comment #309000

The ultimate lesson is this: Expensive crap is going to happen, repeatedly, and deep in debt is no position from which to respond to such crap happening at any level; personal to national. Therein lies the cosmic significance of global warming, 9/11, Katrina, the BP disaster, and the Great Recession, all in one decade, and all of which have only contributed to our going ever deeper in debt and headlong toward insolvency; ever less equipped to effectively respond to the next “happening”.

Tune in, turn on, and save up, is the wisdom of our time. More and more Americans are wising up. But, their pace is two steps forward, 1.5 back. At this rate, the “happenings” will overtake us. What a trip, man. A real thrill ride fraught with hidden dangers, stomach galloping peaks, and valleys of 3G’s of weightiness, and all for the cheap price of neglect and ignorance.

Our sophistry and technology, by all apparent signs, have outpaced our ability to adapt and respond appropriately, which is the soul of the definition of respson-i-bility. If people would stop defining responsible as taking blame, and take its wisest meaning, being prepared to respond appropriately, our civilizations just might have a fighting chance against our own foibles, oversights, and lack of foresight of future “happenings”.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 21, 2010 8:25 PM
Comment #309013

Don’t get sick, children:

Major insurers to drop child policies ahead of coverage mandate

Posted by: Adrienne at September 22, 2010 12:58 AM
Post a comment