American Politics during the Obama Presidency

Before getting all worked up, on the right and left, please examine the numbers I present as reasonable approximations only, and give me credit for stating from the outset that these numbers are only reasonable approximations.

We have over 325 million people living in the USA. We do not know the exact number, but let us say the there are 75 million medicare and medicaid recipients. That leaves 250 million people who need health insurance not provided by the government. Approximately 50% of those people, or 125 million, are uninsured. The Administration says that over 7 million people signed up for health insurance through the exchanges. We will give them the benefit of the doubt and say that the final number will be 8 million, AND that all eight million have paid their premiums, AND that all 8 million are newly insured that did not have health insurance before ACA. The administration said PEOPLE, not HOUSEHOLDS signed up; however, I will give them further benefit of the doubt and say that they meant households. If the average household is a generous 6 persons, that means that 48 million people are now insured who previously were not.

That is less than half of the 125 million uninsured population of the USA. Even if the medicare and medicaid component is increased, we still do not have universal healthcare in the USA. I believe that everyone who feels ill should be able to see a doctor, but I also believe that ACA is not the answer. All parties should be ashamed.

Theodore Roosevelt tried for universal healthcare, and failed. Virtually every president who came after him also tried and failed because the special interests who run the USA did not want universal healthcare. They want special interest healthcare, and ACA gives them what they want. If the nation had not been distracted by the Viet Nam War, I seriously doubt that medicare would be the law of the land. My father was a medical doctor, and he said that "socialized medicine", aka medicare, doubled his income.

Tres3.

[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;439096]Punter-.

That's a fine attempt at a history lesson and if you had paid attention in your 100 level comparative politics class you would know that beginning with FDR's New Deal and finalizing with Johnson's Great Society and Civil Rights programs the placement on the political spectrum of the two main "catch all" political parties in the USA switched places (both are right of center, currently the Republicans are slightly further right than the Democrats).[/QUOTE]I'm glad you enjoyed the history lesson, I struggled to get down to a level I felt you could comprehend, considering your leftwing (brainwashing) education.

"100 level comparative politics class" I must have taken that before progressive liberal professors started [STRIKE]teaching[/STRIKE] planting "new history" into wannabe elitist like you. But [I]“I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponent's youth and inexperience”.[/I] LOL.

I can't believe you would even mention racist like FDR and LBJ. For those of you who studied "New History" rather the Real History and for the benefit of any lurking LIV, you should know FDR gave us Executive Order 9066 which created internment camps for Japanese Americans in 1942. A situation Ronald Reagan had to clean up in 1988 with the Civil Liberties Act.

LBJ was a war mongering Dixiecrat segregationist who embraced the civil rights issue only after he realized the value of the "Black Vote".

[QUOTE][i]“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”-LBJ[/i][/QUOTE]"The Party-switching myth is something we hear from Democrats, but nobody ever has a clear point or example in history for where it occurs. Ever since the birth of the Republican party in 1854, Republicans were strong supporters of abolition." Meanwhile, Democrats had KKK members in Congress, and many Democrats not only voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but also gave quite a lengthy filibuster. Republicans championed the Constitutional amendments ending slavery, giving African-Americans the right to vote, as well as securing that right. Civil Rights legislation as well as anti-lynching laws, and anti-poll taxes were pushed through by Republicans to ensure this, while Democrats fought them tooth and nail".

Prior to President Kennedy's civil rights speech of June 11,1963, (in which he asked for legislation "giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public,) he voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did many other Democrats. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King".

The New Deal? Japanese Americans probably refer to the "Raw Deal" and if you want to see some results of Johnson's Great Society just look no farther than Detroit City, a city in ruins which hasn't had a Republican mayor in 50 years.

Political parties switching places is myth, Democrats would have us believe they sprinkled on a little Holy Water and cleansed themselves of their racist history. Today Democrats use drug pusher tactics to addict people to government assistant. But there is nothing in the Republican Parties history or platform that puts them anywhere even remotely close to the racist level of the Democrat Party.

You can't just change your platform and erase your history.

I see seven rockets fired from the Gaza Strip just landed in southern Israel during the Jewish Passover holiday on Monday.

Perhaps you'd like tell us your opinion on Israel and the Jews now,...or maybe not?

I'm glad you enjoyed the history lesson, I struggled to get down to a level I felt you could comprehend, considering your leftwing (brainwashing) education.

“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”-LBJ

(Sorry to cut and paste, couldn't get the Reply with Quote to work for some reason)

Punter, I read that quote and just had to Google it and find the source. Came upon this article:

http://w-dervish.blogspot.com.ar/2014/01/highly-dubious-lbj-quote-what-it-says.html

Here's some excerpts, you can read the whole thing yourself. ("My Commentary" refers to the author of the article)

____________________________________________________________________________________________

What follows is from hour 1 of the same Thom Hartmann broadcast quoted above, this time beginning at the 37:14 mark...

Caller: ...the woman who gave a quote from LBJ; saying that the Democratic Party was going to have, quote, the "niggers voting Democratic for the next 100 years...". ... That quote can be found all over the internet on Rightwing blogs, and it can be traced back to one book by a very Rightwing author, Ronald Kessler, and it's in a book called Inside the White House. And [thequote] has never been corroborated by anyone else. He is the only person who ever alleged that LBJ said that, that I can find.

TH: To say that trying to eliminate poverty in the United States, when the vast majority of people in poverty in the United States were [andare] White, was going to, somehow win the Democratic Party the Black vote for 200 years; that doesn't make any sense that LBJ would say such a thing... it's not how he spoke; it's not how he thought; and it certainly wasn't his motivation. But it has clearly brainwashed some young Conservatives. Thanks for sharing that with us.

My Commentary: Those brainwashed include some older Libertarians as well (as illustrated by the excerpt from Mr. LB's blog above, as well as this comment from the blog of Ayn Rand devotee Rational Nation). And Wikipedia notes that Mr. Kessler is also the author of a 2004 book titled "A Matter of Character" which is "an admiring look at George W. Bush's presidency". That is reason enough to strongly suspect that the LBJ quote is not accurate.
While I can not say for sure if Mr. Kessler is the only source for this quote, LBJ's prior actions while in the Senate very much contradict the idea that LBJ was a racist who signed Civil Rights legislation because it would help Democrats trick African Americans into voting Democratic. The following book quote via an article on the Media Matters website...

LBJ biographer Robert A. Caro: In the Summer of 1957....

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

So, did LBJ really say that? Well, nobody supplies a source other than this Kessler fellow. But I have to disagree with the author's contention that just because Kessler wrote an admiring look at the Bush presidency makes the quote suspect, and reading the Kessler bio on Wikipedia makes me question the contention he is very rightwing author like the caller suggests. So I don't know if LBJ truly said it, and I wouldn't feel I could present it as fact.

But I can easily believe what the caller says about it being all over the internet on right wing blogs. Probably the blogs where they love name calling and specialize in belittling people. Let me see if I can do that:

I'm glad you enjoyed the history lesson, I struggled to get down to a level I felt you could comprehend, considering your rightwing (brainwashing) education.

Pretty good, huh Punter?

I should mention there is a great LBJ quote which I not only believe to be true but I can give you a source:

Of the Latin American regional group, the Organization of American States, LBJ said on an occasion when he knew his words would be repeated, "It couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel." The OAS had been notoriously indecisive and ineffective, but one OAS diplomat remarked that it "made us think that your President does not consider us too important.".

Source: Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson, by Eric F. Goldman, p .382 , Mar 1, 1974.

[QUOTE=RockinBob;439114]I should mention there is a great LBJ quote which I not only believe to be true but I can give you a source:

Of the Latin American regional group, the Organization of American States, LBJ said on an occasion when he knew his words would be repeated, "It couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel." The OAS had been notoriously indecisive and ineffective, but one OAS diplomat remarked that it "made us think that your President does not consider us too important.".

Source: Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson, by Eric F. Goldman, p .382 , Mar 1, 1974.[/QUOTE]As usual LBJ didn't get it right.

It is " ...upside down on the heel...".

Don B.

[quote=RockinBob]So, did LBJ really say that? Well, nobody supplies a source other than this Kessler fellow. But I have to disagree with the author's contention that just because Kessler wrote an admiring look at the Bush presidency makes the quote suspect, and reading the Kessler bio on Wikipedia makes me question the contention he is very rightwing author like the caller suggests. So I don't know if LBJ truly said it, and I wouldn't feel I could present it as fact.[/quote] Bob the quote was supposedly made in 1957 when LBJ flipped on his Dixiecrat segregationist buddies. (I did try to add that to the post but the edit button only gave me a blank text box) The book author you speak of is the source and to my knowledge it has not been disproved. However the quote is only a small part of my post, so I assume you consider the rest of the post to be spot on. The readers can decide if the LBJ quote fits or not, if I could edit I would just take it out because it's really irrelevant and doesn't change the racist history of the Democrat party.
[quote=RockinBob]But I can easily believe what the caller says about it being all over the internet on right wing blogs. Probably the blogs where they love name calling and specialize in belittling people. Let me see if I can do that:

I'm glad you enjoyed the history lesson, I struggled to get down to a level I felt you could comprehend, considering your rightwing (brainwashing) education.

Pretty good, huh Punter?[/quote]Interesting that you want to single out one sentence and call me out for “name calling and belittling people”. Do you read the fucking forum? Where was you when the quotes below were made? Or maybe it's ok for a lefty to “name call and belittle people” in your book?

[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;439096]Punter-.

That's a fine attempt at a history lesson and if you had paid attention in your 100 level comparative politics class you would know[snip] [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;439095]Fox News is entertainment and positive reinforcement for brainwashed right wingers such as Jackson and his fascist fanboys; [snip][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;439040] Jackson is so deeply infected by Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS) [snip][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;439029]Mongers-.

Jackson and his fascist fan boys (Doppel, Punter, etc) continue to sound increasing antiquated, out of touch, and downright delusional as a result of their chronic infection of Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS). They sound more and more like George Wallace during the dying days of segregation.[snip] Or is it far more likely that Jackson and his fascist fan boys, who are the of the same ilk of those who fought against liberating the slaves, woman suffrage, ending segregation / Jim Crow laws, ADA, etc. Are DEAD WRONG?

Also I am still waiting for Jackson to admit to his fascist fan boys that he is a hypocrite and a parasite [snip][/QUOTE]

The fact that you climbed up my ass while ignoring ElAlamoPalermo remarks cast a bit of a shadow on your integrity Bob, but I can't say that I'm surprised.

Rock on Bob.

[quote]Bob the quote was supposedly made in 1957 when LBJ flipped on his Dixiecrat segregationist buddies. (I did try to add that to the post but the edit button only gave me a blank text box) The book author you speak of is the source and to my knowledge it has not been disproved. However the quote is only a small part of my post, so I assume you consider the rest of the post to be spot on. The readers can decide if the LBJ quote fits or not, if I could edit I would just take it out because it's really irrelevant and doesn't change the racist history of the Democrat party.[/quote]First, I got to say I my attempt to edit my post gave me a blank text box as well, and now I still don't get anything when I click on reply with quote. Tried a different browser, same result! Jackson! What's up with that!

Second, just because I take issue with one part of your post does not mean I agree with all the rest of it. It is an assumption on your part, and not logically arrived at.

Third, "it's just a small part of my post." Please. Your honor, yes that's a lie but it's the only one in my entire testimony!

Fourth, you say the quote was "supposedly made" in 1957. OK, fine, so maybe it was more likely he said it, if he said it early on. But what does that prove? The point is, there is no record of him having said it, no transcript of a tape recording or speech, nothing. It would be nice to actually read Kessler's book to find out more about where he got the quote. And how he managed to get it all down word for word.

I don't care about the history of the demographic party. My point is this: you claim that liberals (whatever that means) are "brainwashed." People who are brainwashed are people who believe things that are unsubstantiated, who believe that since the same thing is repeated in many places by many people it must be true. And then they go and present their beliefs as though they were facts. Assumptions, suppositions, allegations, beliefs strongly held or otherwise, are not facts.

[quote]The fact that you climbed up my ass while ignoring ElAlamoPalermo remarks cast a bit of a shadow on your integrity Bob, but I can't say that I'm surprised.[/quote]No, the shadow is on your integrity. I don't care what ElAlamoPalermo says, he's not part of the current discussion. The point is that in one particular instance you accuse others of being brainwashed. I'm talking about you, one particular post.

I'm not climbing up your ass, I'm just throwing your own words back at you about brainwashing after I have given a specific example of how you exhibit the behavior of someone who is brainwashed. You repeat unsubstantiated quotes, you present them as facts to us and to yourself.

What would you like me to do? Tell ElAlamoPalermo that if he doesn't tone down his remarks I'm going to kick his scrawny liberal ass from Recoleta to Palermo and back again?

[QUOTE=Esten;439043]Hey Jax, when you get healthcare in Argentina, do you pay 100% of the costs?[/QUOTE]Yes. I have for years a policy with private hospital system here in Argentina. I pay my entire premium without benefiting from any line item subsidy. Of course Rock will argue that some of the hospital's employees rode to work on subsidized public transportation, or that some of the medical staff was educated at subsidized public universities, etc. etc., but I am not a net beneficiary of these "trickledown subsidies".

[QUOTE=Tres3;439016]The only way to make Esten leave is to ignore him. He relishes the anti-Esten posts, and thrives on stirring up the anti-Esten sentiment among the more conservative posters on this board. That is one of the reasons that he does not care about separating fact from fiction.

Tres3.[/QUOTE]Esten will not leave this forum until the DNC appoints his replacement.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;439100]Sounds like Rush is out.

[URL]http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/18/1293043/-Rush-Limbaugh-Is-In-Ruins-Bad-News-Coming-From-Every-Direction-Including-The-Right?detail=email[/URL][/QUOTE]All that DailyKooks story does is document the Left's intolerance for any expression of opposing views, in this case by intimidating and attacking Rush Limbaugh's advertisers.

Thanks,

Jax

[B]Attacking the Messenger, Ignoring the Message, right Bob?[/B]

[QUOTE=Rockin Bob;439118]I'm not climbing up your ass, I'm just throwing your own words back at you about brainwashing after I have given a specific example of how you exhibit the behavior of someone who is brainwashed. You repeat unsubstantiated quotes, you present them as facts to us and to yourself.[/quote] First I believe there is only one quote in question here, the other quote you mentioned ([i]"niggers voting Democratic for the next 100 years..."[/i]) was not in my post. The words you were “throwing back” were a reply to ElAlamopalermo and were directed at him, they had nothing to do with you, and I'm sorry if it offended you, but if the shoe fits feel free to wear it.

Btw do you really think ElAlamopalermo needs you to fight his battles? Not on your best day my friend!

Would you have liked it better if I written the sentence this way;

[i] I'm glad [strike]you[/strike] ElAlamopalermo enjoyed the history lesson, I struggled to get down to a level I felt [strike]you[/strike] ElAlamopalermo could comprehend, considering [strike]your[/strike] ElAlamopalermo leftwing (brainwashing) education.[/i] How's that work for [strike]you[/strike] Rockin Bob? Pretty good, huh Bob?

[QUOTE=Rockin Bob;439118]I don't care about the history of the demographic party. My point is this: you claim that liberals (whatever that means) are "brainwashed." [snip][/quote]
Others do care about the history of the party, and I never said “liberals (all) are brainwashed”, I actually think liberalism is a sickness.

[QUOTE=Rockin Bob;439118]Fourth, you say the quote was "supposedly made" in 1957. OK, fine, so maybe it was more likely he said it, if he said it early on. But what does that prove?[snip][/quote]Are you admitting that “early on” LBJ was a racist? You know where the quote came from and if it's true it proves LBJ made racist remarks, and it suggest that he only changed his stance to get the black vote. Did he ever do anything for any other minority? I can't prove the quote is gospel and you can't prove it's wrong, but I can tell you this, on this forum and others people are accused of being racist both directly and implied just because they disagree with Obama's policies. Now I really don't have a problem with you questioning the quote and I don't have problem with you saying you don't believe it, but it looks to me like you are attacking the messenger, and ignoring the message. I guess if that's all you got you go with it, right Bob?

Oh btw the message I was trying to get across and that you are trying to move us away from is the fact that the Democrat Party has a racist history and the Republican Party does not. That's the bottom line.

[QUOTE=Rockin Bob;439118]What would you like me to do? Tell ElAlamopalermo that if he doesn't tone down his remarks I'm going to kick his scrawny liberal ass from Recoleta to Palermo and back again?[/quote] I would never suggest violence Bob and you'd have to grow a pair first anyway, hell in your case I wouldn't suggest you cross the street on a windy day unless you have a kite string tied to your ass.

However if you can drink enough courage to have a go at ElAlamopalermo let me know and I'll buy a ticket for that show. lol

What I really would like you to do is be fair and treat everybody the same, but I understand your fear of ElAlamopalermo. What you really should do now is man up and admit you went about this all wrong and apologize, but I don't think you got the stones for that either.

I stand by my post, and I'm pretty much finished arguing with you, so you can have the last word...knock yourself out, please!

Punter, I take back what I said about you being brainwashed. You'd have to grow a brain first.

You also need to get a grip on reality. Any normal person who knows me and ElAlamoPalermo knows that when I say I'm going to kick his ass, I'm making a joke, and a pretty funny one at that. You seem totally, completely unable to see the humor in that.

The definitive biography of Lyndon Johnson was a four (4) volume work written by Robert Caro. These books cover LBJ's life from the time he was a child until he became President. My take on this enigmatic man was that he was a consummate, self-centered, and opportunistic politician. Would he play the race card for political gain? Absolutely! Was he a racist? I do not think so. LBJ was from the South, and realized early in his career that racial rhetoric was good for his career, because many of his mentors and benefactors were genuine racists. Many of those same mentors and benefactors were also democrats.

Racism is a difficult definition. Most of my enemies are white, but because of cultural differences, I am not friends with many people whose color, religion, or political persuasion I do not like. Does that make me a racist? I do not think so, but there are those who would disagree. I am often politically incorrect and opinionated, but I still do not consider myself a racist. Again, there are those myopic individuals who would disagree.

Tres3.

Rockin Bob,

Really Bob, [NOPARSE] Reeeeally[/NOPARSE] you was joking, Oh my! Well rest assured I seldom take the words of a nitwit seriously.

But It's ok Bob don't worry, I still love you as much as I ever did. I look forward to seeing you again the next time I'm in BA, you always give me a chuckle and put a smile on my face.

Have a nice day Bob.

[QUOTE=Jackson;439119]Yes. I have for years a policy with private hospital system here in Argentina. I pay my entire premium without benefiting from any line item subsidy. Of course Rock will argue that some of the hospital's employees rode to work on subsidized public transportation, or that some of the medical staff was educated at subsidized public universities, etc. etc., but I am not a net beneficiary of these "trickledown subsidies".


Thanks,

Jax[/QUOTE]The "private" hospital that you use receives heavily (utility bills would be 400-500% higher without the subsidies) subsidized natural gas, electricity, and water. You are a direct beneficiary of those subsidies.

Punter-.

The first twenty african americans elected to the US Congress were all Republicans; between 1935 and 1991 (coinciding with the dates I set forth marking the flip flop of the two parties on the political spectrum) there was a grand total of ZERO Republican african americans elected to the US Congress whereas 45 (forty five) Democrat african americans were elected during that same time period. Overall, since 1935 a grand total of 6 (six) Republican african americans have been sent to congress whereas 109 Democrat african americans have been elected during said period. No matter what collection of misquotes, bullshit, and fox news anecdotes you throw out there as evidence, there is nothing more indicative of party's constituents than who they are sending to congress.

While I'm not a social conservative, this is interesting.

Single-Parent Familes: An Inequality Culprit:

[URL]http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303603904579493612156024266[/URL]

Quote:

Why isn't this matter at the center of policy discussions? There are at least three reasons. First, much of politics is less about what you are for than who you are against, as Jonathan Haidt, a New York University psychology professor, noted in his popular 2012 book "The Righteous Mind." And intellectual and cultural elites lean to the left. So, quite simply, very few professors or journalists, and fewer still who want foundation grants, want to be seen as siding with social conservatives, even if the evidence leads that way.

Second, family breakup has hit minority communities the hardest. So even bringing up the issue risks being charged with racism, a potential career-killer. The experience of the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan is a cautionary tale: Moynihan, who had a doctorate in sociology, served in the Lyndon B. Johnson administration as an assistant secretary of labor and in 1965 published a paper titled "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action," warning about the long-term risk that single-parent households pose for black communities. He was attacked bitterly, and his academic reputation was tarnished for decades.