Town Square

Post a New Topic

If you still think this is not a progressive agenda

Original post made by jimf01, another community, on Mar 16, 2010

So-called health care reform is the lynchpin of the progressive agenda, take the politicians at their own word. Occasionally, we get a glimpse inside the thought process

Web Link

"My biggest fight has been between those who wanted to do something incremental and those who wanted to do something comprehensive," Nancy Pelosi said in a meeting with reporters this morning (3/15/10). "We won that fight, and once we kick through this door, there'll be more legislation to follow."
Ezra Klein (single-payer advocate) was there too: Web Link

Tom Harkin, Senate Leader:

Web Link
note to Tom re: inalienable right the Continental Congress supported the idea that human rights, or Natural Rights, where inherent to all people and could not be transferred, even by those having the rights. Most importantly – these rights where not created by governments – but rather, where acknowledged to already pre-exist and supersede government.
Rep Barney Frank: Single payer is off the table, I wish it weren't, I am all for it…
If we get a good public option, it could lead to single-payer
Web Link

More politicians & pundits give us the real story

Web Link&




Comments (19)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Wayne
a resident of Dublin
on Mar 16, 2010 at 10:37 am

When has pretending made something actually true?

I doubt you know the difference.

Can you do me a favor and misquote me too?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Mom
a resident of Birdland
on Mar 16, 2010 at 12:01 pm

As the books of Ayn Rand has enjoyed a huge boost in sales as Obama's progressive (Marxist) agenda has become clearer, so will Friedrcih von Hayek's, "Road to Serfdom."


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Wayne
a resident of Dublin
on Mar 16, 2010 at 1:04 pm

Besides being a devote plagiarist you are also trying to tell us you are now a fortune teller? You people will believe anything....

I am sure this is just a side effect of regularly scheduled programming. Do you have anything new Pleasanton Mom?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Mar 16, 2010 at 1:47 pm

Spell check: devoted

enjoy the sun...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by David
a resident of Walnut Hills
on Mar 16, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Jim is right. This whole healthcare "reform", in whatever form it finally manifests, is the camel's nose under the tent for the progressives. Once this behemoth govt agency is established, it will only grow and expand devouring our liberties and treasure without regard for qualitiative improvements in our healthcare system. It is a tool for power and control and another chink in the armor of our constitution and founding principles. This is not by accident, but by design. The progressives started with a grandiose plan to take a giant step forward toward statism and socialism, but were beat back by those who cherish liberty. But now, they are once again on the verge of achieving their goals. It is time to once again stand up and defend your liberty. Those on the left know exactly what this debate is really about. Those on the right see it clearly as well. If you are still in the middle on this issue, it is time to pick a side and take a stand. The decision is between Liberty and Tyranny...it is that simple. Stand up Patriots!

BTW - Wayne, your comments are asinine. You'll need to say something interesting in order to get (mis)quoted. Please stay with your leftist cadre...you'll dilute the IQ of those on the right were you to ever come to your senses.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Livermore Mom
a resident of Livermore
on Mar 16, 2010 at 3:39 pm

I'm tired of obama pushing his healthcare agenda when there are more important things to be discussed. In fact, I'm against his push for socialized, government mandated junk. Leave our health, bank accounts, bodies, and decisions up to us. Look at what you did with medicare and social security! What a joke!

I think it's time we let the people know which Democrats are members of, or have been members of, the DSA - democrat socialists of america. Perhaps then people will wake up.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Regressive Agenda Needed!
a resident of Deer Oaks/Twelve Oaks
on Mar 16, 2010 at 4:18 pm

Progressive?!? NO THANK YOU! We need to return to the good old days! Don't forget--it was progressive thinking that led to the economic decline of the Southern States in the 1860s and 1870s. It was also a progressive agenda that disastrously extended the vote to all sorts of people in this country.

Jimf01, David, Livermore Mom, Pleasanton Mom: thanks for being brave enough to speak up for our people (you know what I mean) and fighting progress!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Mom
a resident of Birdland
on Mar 16, 2010 at 5:13 pm

Just got back from the Protest of Government Takeover of Healthcare in front of Congressmen McNerney's office.

It was so great being in the company of Patriots who understand how destructive the Progressive Agenda is, and who are doing everything they know how to do to help stop it.

It was especially great to meet Jimf01 in person! Jim is a wonderful person, a treasure of common sense and good judgement, and a nice guy!

Jimf01, David, Livermore Mom, Regressive Agenda Needed - thank you guys for seeing the truth, you are absolutely correct in your assessment. God Bless.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Curious
a resident of Del Prado
on Mar 16, 2010 at 6:36 pm

@ Pleasanton Mom - you need to have your sarcasm filter checks if you think Regressive Agenda Needed is working for your side.

Thanks for the chuckle.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Mom
a resident of Birdland
on Mar 16, 2010 at 7:24 pm

Curious, you're right, I just read it again, my mistake!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sorry
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 17, 2010 at 4:23 pm

I am just SO sad that more than a year has been spent on the 'Progressives' AGENDA items, rather than dealing with middle-class JOBS. Not, another 2 months have passed since Obama pledged again to deal with JOBS, JOBS, JOBS. It's not happening. It's about LONG term city & county jobs, labor unions at all levels, inner-cities, it's about BBILLIONS of dollars to Obama's major donors to for 2 different solar startups, that will 'start up' in 3- 5 years, but NOTHING has been done about mid-level taxpayers that actually DO CONTRIBUTE to the economy and GDP...like engineers who PRODUCE something but have LOST those jobs. Obama offers more 'special interest' and pie-in-the-sky, but mid-level PRIVATE employees continue to lose their homes, and college kids drop out. City PUBLIC unions, but NOT MAIN STREET. What happened to JOBS, JOBS, JOBS idea ?????


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Mom
a resident of Birdland
on Mar 17, 2010 at 5:08 pm

Sorry,

I am sorry too. But a healthy, strong, stable and secure Middle Class is not a Progressive Agenda item.

Article from AmericanThinker.com

February 04, 2010
What the Obama Budget Reveals
By Jeffrey Folks

Obama's fiscal 2011 budget, totaling $3.834 trillion, provides more than just details about revenues, expenditures, and deficits. It offers the clearest road map yet as to where the president intends to lead America. What that road map reveals is not very reassuring to those who care about limited government.


The most striking fact about the 2011 budget is its sheer size. A budget of $3.834 trillion is over $12,500 for every human being, or $50,000 per family, in the country. This level of spending is nearly equal to all of the wages collected by American workers in 2010. These numbers prove that the federal government has become a monstrous beast feeding off the lives of the citizenry.


The 2011 budget also reveals Obama's thorough disdain for free-market capitalism. Given free rein, the Democratic administration would seize the profits of all public and private corporations, effectively nationalizing the economy in the way that Chávez has done in Venezuela. The 2011 budget actually goes a long way in this direction. Other than huge tax increases on individuals resulting from expiration of the Bush tax cuts, the largest increases in the Obama budget come from so-called reform of taxation on American corporations operating overseas. This, of course, includes nearly all large corporations. The annual tax increase would be $13.6 billion for this measure alone.


The administration freely admits that its proposed tax increases are "targeted." What it refuses to discuss is its rationale for deciding which groups or industries are to be hit with higher taxes and which are to see their taxes lowered.


An analysis of the proposed changes reveals their cunning and deceptive nature. As Obama has so often repeated, he proposes to limit tax increases on those earning more than $200,000 a year, though this does not rule out indirect taxation via new taxes and fees on goods and services, such as a "transaction tax" on investments. For those in upper brackets, marginal rates would increase by about 15% to 39.6%; capital gains, interest, and dividends would be taxed at a 20% rate rather than 15%; and deductions for home mortgage interest, charitable donations, and other itemized deductions would be reduced to 28%. This, however, is just the beginning. Obama would reinstate the death tax, seizing 45% of estates over $3.5 million. Obama's proposed tax increases average out to $200 billion per year for the foreseeable future, and these increases do not even address Social Security and Medicare.


So much for the upper-middle class. The middle class, for whom Obama claims to be constantly "fighting," won't find much to like in this budget, either.


So for whom was this deficit-rich budget concocted? Clearly, it was for those special-interest groups and lobbyists who supported Obama in the 2008 election. The wealth-envy crowd will applaud the $10-billion annual bank "responsibility fee." The environmental lobby will approve the $4 billion annual tax increase on oil and gas companies. Teachers' unions will appreciate the 9% increase in education funding. Low-income voters will enjoy the increase in child and earned income credits, along with extensions in unemployment benefits and an additional $100 billion in government make-work spending.


Unfortunately for the underclass and everyone else, the proposed new taxes and deficit spending increases will be passed along in the form of higher prices. If approved in anything like its current form, the 2011 budget will have increased federal spending by 30% over the 2008 figure. Obama would have us believe that this money will come right out of the pockets of "the rich." Some of it undoubtedly will, but the bulk of this spending is funded by tax increases on corporations and increases in the national debt. The cost of these tax increases will be passed down to everyone.


Obama's budgetary road map calls on spending $100 billion for new job creation, but the only significant jobs Obama has created so far are those in Washington. If $787 billion created only 65,000 jobs, how many will be created by another $100 billion? And how long will any of these make-work government jobs last? Even if Obama's massive spending were to create 100,000 jobs, what kind of jobs would these be? So far, most have been jobs within the federal bureaucracy. And what is it, exactly, that public-sector jobs produce? Lots more regulation, for one thing, and the result is a reduction of private-sector jobs that actually produce something of value.


The 2011 budget reveals just how little Obama knows about the private sector. Does the president actually believe that productive jobs can be created by federal diktat out of thin air? Obama's budget points to a dismal future in which half of the country subsists on welfare while the other half receives a paycheck for processing welfare claims in the federal bureaucracy.


Above all, the 2011 budget reveals just how reckless Obama has become. With its projected annual deficits of well over a trillion dollars, the current administration is risking a future economic meltdown for the sake of securing its own political power. Despite duplicitous talk of belt-tightening, Obama has rejected the prudent course of large spending cuts. Obama's road map points to a future in which America is overwhelmed by debt. At that point, the middle class will be working overtime just to pay interest on the national debt. None of the president's special interest groups will be faring so well, either.


Dr. Jeffrey Folks taught for thirty years in universities in Europe, America, and Japan. He has published many books and articles on American culture and politics.

Page Printed from: Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Mar 17, 2010 at 8:48 pm

Here's another:

Anytime I can support the president, I'd like to. I just - except on this bill, I signed a commitment with 77 other members of Congress, saying that if there was not robust public option in the health care bill, that was presented to the House, I wouldn't vote for it. I kept my word. - Dennis Kucinich

"The entire health care debate was flipped upside down by insurance interests who were able to intervene so that the final product that was offered out of the Senate was nothing more than a sell-out to the insurance industry." - Rep. Kucinich, February 4, 2010

"However, after careful discussions with President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and others, Kucinich said, "I've decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation." - Dennis Kucinich, March 17, 2010


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rat Turd
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 17, 2010 at 9:33 pm

Jim01,

Enjoy


Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Mom
a resident of Birdland
on Mar 18, 2010 at 7:34 am

Rat Turd,

I love this one: Web Link

"The Government Can"

Enjoy!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by The Liberals are Coming!
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 18, 2010 at 11:50 pm

Web Link
The list (explanations can be found in the article itself):

1. The plan is not a government takeover of health care like in Canada or Britain.
2. Insurance companies will be regulated more heavily.
3. Everyone will have to have health insurance or pay a fine, a requirement known as the individual mandate.
4. Employers will not be required to buy insurance for their employees, but large employers may be subject to fines if they don't provide insurance.
5. The vast majority of people will not see significant declines in premiums.
6. The plan might or might not bend the curve on health spending.
7. The government-run Medicare program will keep paying medical bills for seniors, but it will begin implementing cost controls on health care providers, mostly through penalties and incentives.
8. Medicaid, a joint federal-state program for the poor, will cover all of the poor, instead of just a few groups the way it currently does.
9. The government won't pay for elective abortions.
10. No one is proposing new benefits for illegal immigrants.

I will be the first to admit I don't entirely like what the bill has become; I think that in trying to be bi-partisan (pfft) a lot of important issues were tabled. However, 15.3% of the U.S's GDP is spent on health care (Web Link). Many people around me have been adversely affected by the current system, either because the premiums grew absurdly high, or they lost their jobs, or went through surgery and then got screwed over because they then had a "pre-existing condition". The current system is broken.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Mar 19, 2010 at 9:45 am

jimf01 is a registered user.

The entire thing is more or less true, but of course if you believe the words of your own politicians, they are working towards goals completely different from what truth-o-meter is fact checking.

The plan is not a government takeover of health care like in Canada or Britain, Insurance companies will be regulated more heavily, No one is proposing new benefits for illegal immigrants.

- Yes, in this bill that would all be true, but the ultimate goal is single payer health care which would be a complete takeover which would make private health insurance illegal and would provide complete health care to everyone, regardless of immigration status.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by lmfao @ jimfo1
a resident of Carriage Gardens
on Mar 19, 2010 at 6:49 pm

That was awesome! "Yes, all that is true, and yet, I will now assert that the opposing falsehoods are also true."

Brilliant!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Mar 19, 2010 at 10:27 pm

You should read what I write before mocking me, joker. What I stated is not in opposition, it is the next step. These truths are documented by our politicians own words. You can discount everything that every pundit and analyst says and listen to what the Democrat leaders state are the goal with HCR. It is that simple.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Measure BB could pay to connect Dublin Boulevard to Livermore
By Tim Hunt | 5 comments | 1,184 views

Moving to Maine, Maybe
By Roz Rogoff | 5 comments | 987 views

“…and all I ask of dyin’, is to go naturally” *
By Tom Cushing | 11 comments | 777 views