The Fatal Four

With the final vote on the healthcare bill approaching slowly but surely, a nation is on the edge of its seat.

After months of debate and full-blown argument over whether or not to reform our broken healthcare system, the time is coming where history will be made one way or the other.

It seems for democrats that a healthcare reform bill with a government-run public option will either be a historic victory that will better change the way we care for our fellow Americans, or it will be yet another embarrassing loss just like the time before that and the time before that. It will be their defining moment or their Waterloo.

While the momentum feels slightly on the democrat's side (at least to me anyway), predicting how this will ultimately play out is nothing more than a guessing game at this point.... or just wishful thinking.

After months of debating and arguing with the republicans on this issue, it turns out that if healthcare reform does not pass it will not be because of republicans. They do not plan on helping democrats pass healthcare reform but if this bill does not pass it will be because of a few people, maybe even one. And not a one of them are republican.

When it comes to the healthcare debate that raged on this past summer, the democrats had their guns pointed at an enemy that didn't even have a sling shot. The democrats biggest threat for healthcare reform are the democrats.

The republicans have made it loud and clear that they do not want anything to do with this bill.

So let's oblige them!

Let's shift our focus to the ones who actually could nix this and have threatened to stop us dead in our tracks on healthcare reform.

I bring you.....

The Fatal Four!


It sounds like an action movie about four deadly ninjas or kung-fu badasses.

But in reality it is about four well bought, handsomely paid senators who have the power to give our healthcare reform bill a lethal one inch punch of death.

This movie could also be called "Three Bluedogs & a Weasel"

Anyway, here are the stars of our motion picture.....


First on the list is Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson.

Ben Nelson is a democrat in a traditional red state. While he voted to allow debate and has shown slight interest in a state "opt-out" public option, he has repeatedly slammed the idea of a public option in the healthcare bill and said he has no problem being the only democrat to vote against it.

And while I'm sure this has nothing to do with his stance on healthcare reform, it seems Ben Nelson has received over $1 Million from big insurance over his career and has received $452,586 this year alone for his campaign committee. A number of Nelson's staff are former healthcare lobbyist and many have left Nelson's team to go work for big insurance. - campaignmoney.org & OpenSecrets.org

But I'm sure this has nothing to do with why Ben Nelson would not want private insurance to have any competition....

Because it certainly is not his constituents influencing his decision.

Recent polls show that Nebraska slightly supports the public option. Since he is a democrat in a red state, he may face political backfire anyway he votes. Although I would take into consideration that in that red state, a slight majority supports the public option.... in a red state!

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think it says something when a red state backs a blue initiative? Even though this is only stated in a few polls. Even if it were 50/50, that would still speak volumes that the public option is a popular idea, even in Nebraska.

Also, 11% of Nebraska have no health insurance.

But I guess that 11% also can't afford to give Senator Nelson hundreds of thousands of dollars so that he would actually represent them.


Next on the list is Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu. She is not as intense in her dislike of the public option as Ben Nelson, but she is still very shaky on the idea.

Now when it comes to taking money from insurance, Landrieu does have Nelson beat at $1.6 Million to his $1.3 Million. But a few hundred thousand is chump change amongst these millionaires. It's just that we're the chumps.....

Senator Landrieu's staff is also riddled with insurance lobbyist. Another stunning fact is that 64% of her campaign fund are from out-of-state donors. Louisiana, the state she is suppose to be representing only gives her 36%. - campaignmoney.org & OpenSecrets.org

When Landrieu was asked about many polls showing support for the public option in her state, she said that the polls were faulty because its in how you ask the questions. The she went on in the same interview to say that the public was confused about the public option because they think it is free healthcare and that could be the reason for it's support.

So the polls are all fake and we are too stupid to understand the public option?

Since it's all in the questions, I have one for you Senator Landrieu......

Do you want to get re-elected?

Senator Landrieu has said she may be open to a "Opt-out" or "Opt-in" form of the public option, but of course we are too dumb to understand it!

21% of Louisiana are uninsured


Third is Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln. She has been pretty stern about her opposition to the public option. She has taken the less money from big insurance than anyone else in the fatal four. However, the measly half a million dollars she received from insurance was enough to buy her complete loyalty to them. - OpenSecrets.org

Her loyalty runs so deep that she even thinks competition would be bad for the insurance companies.

“One of our biggest concerns is that it doesn’t need to be a government plan that usurps that ability to compete in the marketplace, which I’m concerned that a totally government-run option would do,”

The fact that we now have a totally private-run monopoly does not concern Senator Lincoln. How dare we suggest that these "health" insurance companies that are increasingly responsible for their customers deaths and raise costs every chance they get be burdened with a competition that keeps costs down and won't deny you when you get sick.

When Senator Lincoln was expressing her concerns about government-run competition, i wonder if she thought to ask the whopping 34% of Arkansas with no health insurance about their concerns? Concerns that they don't get sick or injured?

With polls showing very strong support for the public option in Arkansas, Blanche Lincoln should be more concerned about her political future if she continues to shill for the insurance companies instead of her constituents.


Last and least..... Joe Lieberman. This one is the most interesting case because this could all possibly be a game and a publicity stunt. He has done this sort of thing in the past.

If it's not a stunt, it's political suicide.

Joe Lieberman is from Connecticut where an overwhelming majority support the public option. in fact, every district in Connecticut supports a public option. Connecticut is fairly liberal and if Lieberman is trying to get re-elected, he is going about it the wrong way. Supporting McCain during the last presidential election was one thing, but if he puts his money where his mouth is and blocks healthcare reform.... he's done in 2012. This is not an opinion, this is fact.

Speaking of money, Lieberman has received roughly $800,000 last year from big insurance. Not the highest paid by the insurance industry but he is the most vocal and prominent senator against a public option in healthcare reform.

The funny thing is though........

Connecticut ALREADY HAS a PUBLIC OPTION!

"Charter Oak Health Plan is a state-run program that is designed to compete in the market for individual insurance policies. That means people who are buying individual health care plans — the unemployed, young college graduates, early retirees — can get coverage under Charter Oak. The state has contracted with three insurers to offer a variety of coverage options. Premiums and deductibles depend on household income. " - Politifact.org

This plan insures 10,000 people in Connecticut.

So let me get this straight, Joe Lieberman says that a public option will destroy healthcare and that he will not support any sort of government option. Yet his state has a form of a public option that successfully covers 10,000 citizens in Connecticut?

Do you see why I think this is all a show being played by Lieberman?

I think that he has bolstered himself as the ringleader of anti-government healthcare on the left side of the isle because there is money to be made. He will be offered deals from both sides. His arms being pulled from both directions until he is bought by the highest bidder. While I do believe that if he even votes against the healthcare reform bill, let alone is the one that puts a stop to it; he will have a primary challenger so fast his head will spin, he is on some political safe-ground for one reason......

He is, after all, an independent.

But not even that will stop the firestorm that will reign upon him. He will hopefully be stripped of his chairmanships that he has with the democratic party (Still not sure how he backed McCain in 2008 and still has chairmanships with the democrats?) and face a primary challenger that will most likely beat him in 2012.

Joe Lieberman is either an idiot or a genius.

We'll find out soon.


Many are shaking in their boots over what these 100 senators are going to do to our healthcare system. Some are afraid the process will politicize and compromise away any hope of getting REAL healthcare reform to America. While critics are afraid of a so-called government takeover of our healthcare system that will slowly strip away freedoms and bring about red socialism that will kill your pets.

There is no raving confidence coming from either side right now, but I am rooting for this and continue to remain an optimist.

I think we are all good-hearted people and it is in our blood to help others in need. I think that since the beginning of time we have revolted against suffering, injustice, corruption, and greed. Even though there have been certain periods where this idea, this philosophy has been muted and smothered, it has never died. While there is still so much work to be done, we have came a long way as human beings in our fight for fairness, tolerance, and peace. As people, we will always differ and view the world through different lenses, but when we lose our ability to care for all people equally and keep close to heart the principals of "United we stand, Divided we fall" and "I am my brother's keeper". When we let ourselves be convinced by opportunists that the kindness in our hearts is a weakness, that is when we lose everything.

I don't want to walk away from this learning and accepting more and more that we are just a country where our leaders are nothing more than corporate players in disguise as public servants and a country where money talks louder than it's very own people.

I refuse to believe that.

I believe that the voice of the millions of uninsured, who pray everyday that they do not get sick, speaks far louder than lobbyist money. The ones who have NO option. Some lost their jobs and therefor lost their coverage. Some are poor and can't afford insurance. Some of them were not eligible because they were not healthy enough and would cost the insurance company too much money. Whatever the situation, these people have no healthcare in the richest country in the world.

I think we need to start realizing that just because you are insured, does not mean you are covered.

I don't believe that money talks louder than the millions that have insurance but were not covered when the chips were down. Paying customers denied care because the insurance companies didn't want to part with the money that they got from customers who were tricked into thinking the health insurance industry was actually healthcare, and not just another corporation out to make a buck.

To call what we have now a healthcare system is laughable.

If the Fatal Four stop healthcare reform with a public option, they may prove more fatal to themselves than anyone else. They may be able to deny us a public option and our freedom of choice, but they will never be able to take away one option from us, one choice....

Our vote.

If they opt-out on us, we will opt-out on them!

How to End War

As I write this, we are close to finding out what President Obama's final decision will be for Afghanistan. Quite possibly the toughest decision the president has had to make thus far, with half the country saying "Go for it" and the other half saying "Don't you dare"... This will not be easy no matter what he does. Someone's about to be pissed off!

Supporters of the "War on Terror" handed down from the last administration argue that we must continue to wage the war. That we must not stop fighting terrorism until the world is rid of them. If this is possible?

Protesters of the war argue that it is an Un-winnable war that will turn into another Vietnam. That we will be sending lives and billions maybe trillions of dollars fighting an enemy that Russia failed to destroy roughly 20 years ago.

President Obama is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to Afghanistan.

Information out today suggests that we will probably get a compromise of some sort. The problem is that this, like so many other issues of the day, is an issue where the American public is not ready to make a deal.

In the midst of all this, many are asking another question.

How are we going to pay for this war?

This is one of the main concerns for Healthcare Reform, but the GOP is yet to wage such outrage about how we are going to pay for this war.

Shocker huh?


White House budget director Peter Orszag has estimated that it would cost $40 billion a year if Gen. McChrystal gets his wish of 40,000 additional troops. The pentagon has the figure at a slightly lower cost. He also said that it would destroy many other things that the Obama administration is trying to do with the economy.

Yep. Wars sure are expensive. You just never hear politicians complaining about the cost unless the money will be used here at home, on our citizens. But if it is to reign hell on a nation that most American's probably can't even correctly point to on a map..... well then take as much money as you need! It's only money!


But now, this could all possibly change....


Recently Rep. David Obey (D-Wisconsin) suggested that we should pay for the war by taxing the wealthy.

And it sounds so crazy, it just might work!

We all know very well that for democrats, the best way to get republicans against anything is to suggest that the rich pay for anything. As long as the bottom 95% are flouting the bill they can barely afford, no problems. But if we do something insane, like charging this war to the top 1% (who have more wealth than the bottom 95% combined) What will this do to the republican party?

Will the war still be worth fighting if the rich have to take a outrageous 1% surtax to pay for it?

During WWII, the rich paid 90% in taxes. If not for their contribution to their country, we may have lost that war. But today that would be called socialism.

Or.... this could lead to something bigger than we ever imagined.

If the rich have to pay for the war, maybe then they won't want the war?

When they have to pay their fair share, maybe that will trigger the peace and love that was in them all along. And all we had to do was threaten to raise their taxes a hair to help fight a war that effects everyone equally despite income and tax bracket.

On issues like healthcare reform, the cost factor and the fact that the rich may help pay for it has conservatives up in arms and dead set against it. If the Afghanistan war is paid for by a surtax on the rich, will we actually see anti-war republicans?

This could work.

If you want to rid the world of something, tax the rich for it and it will be gone.

If the rich start paying for our wars, we may never get into another one again.

The Magical Mystery Vote!

On Saturday, the Senate debated and then voted to further debate the Healthcare Reform Bill.

While there were a few scares here and there during the week, by Saturday afternoon the Senate Democrats said that they had enough votes pledged to guarantee passage for debate. Razor thin on party lines, the likely outcome was said to be 60 yay and 40 nay.

A few hours later the senate debated on and on about whether we should debate Healthcare.

And the final outcome..........

60-39?

What?

This means that someone didn't vote!

When I watched it live, the news anchors didn't even know who the mystery congressman was!

Who was this one congressman who did NOT have an opinion about the intense healthcare debate going on in our country?


Well after a few seconds of hard nose journalism...... I have tracked down this lone senator!

It turn out that it was none other than Sarah Palin's former running mate.......

John McCain

He channeled his inner Maverick and decided not to decide on a healthcare debate.

Fair enough...

I mean, it really didn't matter anyway.

To each his own!


But there is one thing I don't understand. Though nobody said understanding John McCain would be easy.

In my last post I wrote about the 30 senators that voted against the Al Franken Anti-Rape amendment. John McCain included in this list. Out of all the 30 republican senators who took one in the gut for their friends at Halliburton/KBR, John McCain's inclusion in this disappoints me the most. If anyone in Congress could understand the pain and TORTURE that 20-year-old Jamie Leigh Jones went through that night and why we must prevent it at all costs......

I would figure that it would be John McCain?

But I guess not....


So he doesn't vote when it comes to if we should debate reforming our broken healthcare system, yet boldly voted NO loud and clear, when it came to deciding that what happens at Halliburton, Stays at Halliburton. And that women have no rights there.

It is times like these that justify that we picked the better candidate in 2008.

John McCain: Rape at Halliburton..... Sure! Healthcare for Millions....... No Comment!


As I said.......

Nobody said understanding John McCain would be easy....

RAPE-PUBLICANS: Party of 30

Jamie Leigh Jones was an employee at Halliburton/KBR and In 2005 she was stationed in Baghdad, Iraq. She was 20 years old.

One night, several of her co-workers drugged her. Then they took turns raping her. The more compassionate of her attackers didn't beat her as they were gang-raping her. Though many weren't so nice.

She was left physically, mentally and emotionally scarred.

While nothing will ever take away the pain and suffering she must have felt that night, at least we live in a country that believes in justice and surely no company, not even Halliburton, would stand for this behavior from their employees!

Right?

This is where Halliburton fires every single employee involved and helps Jamie in any way she needs because it happened on their clock.

The rapist go to jail. Halliburton/KBR stands up for Jamie and fights to ensure that this will never happen again!

Sadly, Somehow, this is only wishful thinking....


Instead of doing the right thing, or even attempting to, Halliburton/KBR detain her in a shipping container for 24 hours with no food or water.

They tell her that if she leaves Iraq for medical treatment she will be out of a job.

And while she was confined, they placed armed guards outside of her container. Just incase SHE got out of line...

Now a prisoner for a crime that was committed on her, she convinces one of the guards to let her use their cell phone to call her father.

Then her father in turn, called their congressman Rep. Ted Poe R-TX.

Rep. Poe then goes on to call the state department.

The state department contacted the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, who then rescued her from confinement.


Before I continue, I just have one question....

What if Jamie was your daughter, sister, ECT.?


Years later, no justice was brought to Jamie and none of the rapist were arrested or even fired.

Then along came Al Franken.


Franken offered an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies like KBR "if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court."

Sounds pretty logical. right?

In my opinion, that is getting off light for Halliburton/KBR. They should be shut down quicker than you can say "Blood for Oil". But at least it is a step in the right direction.

I mean, if there was ever an issue that Republicans and Democrats could agree on, it would be that rape is bad!

Once again, Wishful Thinking....


While the amendment passed, 30 GOP Senators voted against Jamie and woman's rights and voted for Halliburton and rape.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I bring you, The Rape-publicans.....

Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)


Amongst these moral-less excuses for public servants, are people who vocally argue that ACORN is a corrupt group and should be shut down, who argue that your rights are being taken away from you by the evil president, and who have wives, daughters, sisters and women they love. I'm sure they would be horrified if what had happened to Jamie happened to their loved ones.

So let me get this straight......

ACORN (Accused with no proof of funding prostitution)=BAD

Halliburton/KBR (Imprisoned a 20 year old girl for being raped)=GOOD


Obama (Taking away our freedoms)(Can anyone name one freedom we have lost?)=BAD

Halliburton/KBR (Literally take away a young girls rights)=GOOD


If this wasn't so heartbreakingly sad, it would be humorous.


But maybe I'm being too harsh. Maybe the Dirty 30 have their reasons..... Lets see....

In the debate, Senator Sessions maintained that Franken's amendment overreached into the private sector and suggested that it violated the due process clause of the Constitution.

To which, Senator Franken fired back quoting the Constitution. "Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution gives Congress the right to spend money for the welfare of our citizens. Because of this, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, 'Congress may attach conditions on the receipt of federal funds and has repeatedly employed that power to further broad policy objectives,'" Franken said. "That is why Congress could pass laws cutting off highway funds to states that didn't raise their drinking age to 21. That's why this whole bill [the Defense Appropriations bill] is full of limitations on contractors -- what bonuses they can give and what kind of health care they can offer. The spending power is a broad power and my amendment is well within it."

David Vitter was confronted by a rape victim at a convention. He had no answer to the woman as to why he voted for rape.

I guess it wouldn't help them to get re-elected if they just came out and said that they voted the way they did because Halliburton/KBG gives them a lot of money

Or that they are so partisan that they cannot bring themselves to vote on an amendment proposed by a democrat. Even if it is to stop rape within one of America's biggest companies.

If McCain ever says "Country First" again I will probably throw up!

But when it comes to getting re-elected, I don't think voting for rape is a good way of going about it. But we'll find out for many of them next year.

This is the party that is trying to convince us that they ARE for the people and not all about big business and corporations. This is the party that touts freedom and justice.

If you are reading this as a conservative republican and you feel ashamed and embarrassed.....

Don't fret, it is a good thing.

It means that you have more of a heart and conscience than 30 current U.S. Senators.

This is a new low.

Jamie Leigh Jones was elated and thankful to hear that the Franken Amendment was passed.

"It means that every tear shed to go public and repeat my story over and over again to make a difference for other women was worth it"

Sources: ABC News & Alternet.org

15 Questions for Conservatives

I have a few questions that I would love answers to. I am not attempting to be sarcastic or vindictive. I am sincerely asking. I just want to know a few things to hopefully further understand you and your political views.

This is not a test. There is no wrong answer.

Please feel free to answer any of my questions and if anyone has any questions for me, I will do my best to answer them to the best of my ability.


Question #1. If Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility, then why haven't they balanced the budget or created a strong economy that is fair for all classes since the 50's with Eisenhower?


Question #2. Under Eisenhower, the rich paid 90% in taxes and the middle/lower classes had their taxes cut dramatically. Would you consider Eisenhower to be a socialist?


Question #3. If capitalism is the greatest and most reliable economic system and communism and socialism are failed economic policies, Then why have we (Capitalist) borrowed so much money from China (Communist) that we are almost beholden to them? If our system is the greatest and communism will weaken a country, then shouldn't this situation be the other way around?


Question #4. Why were there no tea parties when Bush was spending and digging a record deficit?


Question #5. How does it make you feel that Iraq is now in a surplus while we are in economic turmoil?


Question #6. Do you believe Jesus when he said that we will be judged at the gates of Heaven by how we treat the least among us?

Question #7. Can you name any of Bush's 47 czars?


Question #8. If you are pro-life, do you continue to fight for life after the baby is born? Do you fight for all life, or just the unborn?


Question #9. Why does the right hate unions so much? Don't we have the right to organize as citizens of the United States?


Question #10. Republicans are outraged about the amount of spending in Washington and are against large spending bills. How much did we spend in Iraq? How much will it cost to surge Afghanistan? What is the most funded government program?


Question #11. Why is it okay to spend massive amounts of money on wars, but not invest in our own country to help our own people? If Healthcare Reform involved a war with another country, would you then support it?


Question #12. How is your heterosexual marriage effected if a homosexual couple gets married?


Question #13. Is Medicare and VA Healthcare socialism?


Question #14. What part of "Option" in "Public Option" don't you understand?


Question #15. If Republican politicians are dead set against anything government, then why don't they quit their government jobs where they get paid with our tax dollars by the government?