Comments on: Of invertebrates, donkeys and ideologues http://www.grass-roots-press.com/2009/11/08/of-invertebrates-donkeys-and-ideologues/ A progressive, alternative source of news and commentary in southern New Mexico Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:40:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: xandtrek http://www.grass-roots-press.com/2009/11/08/of-invertebrates-donkeys-and-ideologues/comment-page-1/#comment-1895 xandtrek Tue, 10 Nov 2009 04:33:11 +0000 http://www.grass-roots-press.com/?p=2387#comment-1895 Some kind of health care legislation needs to be in place. Legislation can be tweaked and refined to include the changes and provisions we demand without incurring the wrath of ideologues. You don't think the Medicare that was originally passed in 1965 is the same today? Just do a quick look at the history of Social Security and Medicare on Wikipedia and you will see how many changes it has been through. If we concentrated on public financing of campaigns and loosed the bonds of dependence on corporations' funding, new legislators would be more willing to properly fix health care for the benefit of the people. And while they are working on it, maybe some lives will be saved or made better in the meantime. Some kind of health care legislation needs to be in place. Legislation can be tweaked and refined to include the changes and provisions we demand without incurring the wrath of ideologues. You don’t think the Medicare that was originally passed in 1965 is the same today? Just do a quick look at the history of Social Security and Medicare on Wikipedia and you will see how many changes it has been through.

If we concentrated on public financing of campaigns and loosed the bonds of dependence on corporations’ funding, new legislators would be more willing to properly fix health care for the benefit of the people. And while they are working on it, maybe some lives will be saved or made better in the meantime.

]]> By: Dan http://www.grass-roots-press.com/2009/11/08/of-invertebrates-donkeys-and-ideologues/comment-page-1/#comment-1892 Dan Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:45:05 +0000 http://www.grass-roots-press.com/?p=2387#comment-1892 Someone with an artistic bent needs to design a suitable "dumping ground" for those rejected from clinics and hospitals because of inability to pay for health care. Tasteful of course, with a modern version of "Mother Theresa" to attend them in their final hours. Perhaps such facilities could be named for prominent Republicans, such was done when penniless families encamped in various places around the U.S. during the Depression named their communities "Hoovervilles". Someone with an artistic bent needs to design a suitable “dumping ground” for those rejected from clinics and hospitals because of inability to pay for health care. Tasteful of course, with a modern version of “Mother Theresa” to attend them in their final hours.
Perhaps such facilities could be named for prominent Republicans, such was done when penniless families encamped in various places around the U.S. during the Depression named their communities “Hoovervilles”.

]]> By: admin http://www.grass-roots-press.com/2009/11/08/of-invertebrates-donkeys-and-ideologues/comment-page-1/#comment-1889 admin Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:01:17 +0000 http://www.grass-roots-press.com/?p=2387#comment-1889 Excellent point, and an argument many of us made forcefully but futilely several months back. Obviously, the leadership let us down, and so did the system, which is rigged to reward those who do the richest lobbyists' bidding. But the half loaf, if it survives, will be a life-saver to many people, even with its shortcomings. Is it really ethical to abandon those most in need by insisting on what is not now attainable in this country when there is an arguably reasonable reform proposal on the table? If it loses the public option, then I will agree it will be worse than nothing. To reject the bill at this point, however, is too much principle before pragmatism. My question remains: if the bill is so bad for us and good for them, why are the insurance companies and conservatives against it? By the way, Conyers voted for the bill. Other than spouting negativity, what is the way forward? We live in a stupid, self-serving, culturally brainwashed society that will only change when pushed to the absolute brink, whereupon violent and reactionary forces will arise, not progressive ones. And saying, 'bring it on' is to turn our backs on the suffering of those caught in the crossfire. Excellent point, and an argument many of us made forcefully but futilely several months back. Obviously, the leadership let us down, and so did the system, which is rigged to reward those who do the richest lobbyists’ bidding. But the half loaf, if it survives, will be a life-saver to many people, even with its shortcomings. Is it really ethical to abandon those most in need by insisting on what is not now attainable in this country when there is an arguably reasonable reform proposal on the table? If it loses the public option, then I will agree it will be worse than nothing. To reject the bill at this point, however, is too much principle before pragmatism. My question remains: if the bill is so bad for us and good for them, why are the insurance companies and conservatives against it?

By the way, Conyers voted for the bill.

Other than spouting negativity, what is the way forward? We live in a stupid, self-serving, culturally brainwashed society that will only change when pushed to the absolute brink, whereupon violent and reactionary forces will arise, not progressive ones. And saying, ‘bring it on’ is to turn our backs on the suffering of those caught in the crossfire.

]]> By: Larry Gioannini http://www.grass-roots-press.com/2009/11/08/of-invertebrates-donkeys-and-ideologues/comment-page-1/#comment-1869 Larry Gioannini Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:52:55 +0000 http://www.grass-roots-press.com/?p=2387#comment-1869 To use a few more cliches such as 'not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good' here's the problem. When the leadership of our side, BHO, caved on day one by compromising to reforming health insurance instead of providing universal health care we lost the battle, stranding some brave soldiers such as Conyers and Kucinich on the battle field. The half a loaf you're willing to accept as a first step will be the last step ever taken in the lifetime of anyone now living. And it will soon disintegrate into a few crumbs the health insurance industry didn't think to turn to their advantage now. When you immediately compromise with your adversary you simply encourage him to demand that you move to the new midpoint between your positions which is that much closer to his original position. The Media has been as spineless as congress in aiding and abetting this process; in health care, ending the war, restoring our civil rights, cleaning up the environment, maintaining net neutrality, etc., etc., etc. It's the old ethical cliche: The end does not justify the means. Especially if it's not the end that's really needed. To use a few more cliches such as ‘not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good’ here’s the problem. When the leadership of our side, BHO, caved on day one by compromising to reforming health insurance instead of providing universal health care we lost the battle, stranding some brave soldiers such as Conyers and Kucinich on the battle field.

The half a loaf you’re willing to accept as a first step will be the last step ever taken in the lifetime of anyone now living. And it will soon disintegrate into a few crumbs the health insurance industry didn’t think to turn to their advantage now.

When you immediately compromise with your adversary you simply encourage him to demand that you move to the new midpoint between your positions which is that much closer to his original position. The Media has been as spineless as congress in aiding and abetting this process; in health care, ending the war, restoring our civil rights, cleaning up the environment, maintaining net neutrality, etc., etc., etc.

It’s the old ethical cliche: The end does not justify the means. Especially if it’s not the end that’s really needed.

]]>