Next you'll be telling me a Bill of Rights was added within 12 years, or that more States joined.And in the same amount of time you'd think people could see that the original government isn't the one that we have now.
interesting that the bloke says there were never the votes in the senate for this. I mean - the Dems have a massive majority, there can't be that many Blue Dogs, surely?
Sure there are. The parties aren´t necessarily split down ideological lines in the States. A sizeable percentage of house Democrats are to the right of many Republicans.
why not bully them into like they do here?
Hahahahahah Hah!
The denizens of the Corporate Republic get the healthcare they deserve. Bunch of invady flag-wavy hysterical pricks.![]()
it´s what 60 to 40 in there? So 1 in 6 dems don´t actually agree with the policy they were elected onwhy not bully them into like they do here?
Isn't it only the disenfranchised who suffer?

There they are happy as Larry, a successful lawyer or doctor or busness executive or whatever, and then WHOLLOP, fender-bender causes whiplash, now let the milking begin.
They're spat out at the endof their journey in debt, bad health and facing homelessness. It's the American way fucker, deal with it. Good thing you ain't Soviet Sweden at least.![]()
The non-voters are the gullible ones. It's that kind of apathy that allows the right to get away with so much.Aye. Americans are a lot less gullible than Brits though. Fifty per cent of Americans don't bother going through the charade of voting, which basically announces to the entire world that they consider the system a joke.
Because US presidents tend to be most powerful during the period early in their terms. The party that controls the white house usually loses seats in congress in the mid term elections, so after the 2010 election the Dems will be weaker. So, it's better to go with a plan that excludes the public option now. Otherwise there will be no health insurance reform bill at all.But he's got three years left!! Why can't he just go with his ideas??!

because voting for hopenchange has gone so well.The non-voters are the gullible ones. It's that kind of apathy that allows the right to get away with so much.
Because it's better than sitting on the sidelines & being cynical. That accomplishes nothing & helps the extreme right.because voting for hopenchange has gone so well.
Because it's better than sitting on the sidelines & being cynical. That accomplishes nothing & helps the extreme right.
Offering gov health insurance is simple? Not in the US. If so it would have been done long ago. The healthcare industry is the biggest & probably most powerful in the country, employing 16 mil people, about 1 in 8 American workers.ok. so, everyone voted. Got a democrat president, congress and senate, all with a mandate for change. And they stiiiiiiiill can´t do something simple like offer a government insurance company.
What situation exactly are you about to create through voting that gives a better chance of change than that?
Offering gov health insurance is simple? Not in the US. If so it would have been done long ago. The healthcare industry is the biggest & probably most powerful in the country, employing 16 mil people, about 1 in 8 American workers.
The problem is the senate. Even with 60 Dems, that's not enough to pass gov ins because some of them are "moderates" from rural/conservative states who likely would be voted out if they supported a public option. We need 60 PROGRESSIVE votes in the senate & we just ain't got um. At least Obama & most Dems are trying. If McCain/Palin were in the WH & the Repubs had a majority in congress, there wouldn't even be a discussion about insurance reform.
Sometimes positive change can only be brought about incrementally & we can only do today what we can do today.
So what's your alternative to voting? Violent revolution? I don't think that would work.
It's the curse of the New Posts culture - every forum becomes the General Forum.I swear, I come here sometimes and wonder if I've mistakenly wandered onto the playground at the youth detention center.![]()
Because it's better than sitting on the sidelines & being cynical. That accomplishes nothing & helps the extreme right.
it could well be true that tony blair and gordon brown really did want to change the country not just be the new acceptable face of the accelerated decimation of society for the all powerful superrich but they just ended up looking like cunts because they didn't realise just what they were up against until they were put in power
everyone votes for change and complains about how nothing changes but how many people are actually out changing anything?
sitting about expecting the answer to come from up high
Matthew Hill investigates the links between psychiatrists and the pharmaceutical industry. Should there be increased transparency over top psychiatrists' links to the industry?
He looks at the influence of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders (DSM), produced by the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which has been heavily criticised in the past for a lack of transparency between the panel members and pharmaceutical companies. Matthew also examines the 'Chinese menu' aspect of the DSM's diagnostic criteria and the sheer number of conditions it includes. Matthew investigates whether the APA's transparency policy goes far enough and if we are medicalising real conditions or just traits of human personality.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00kf117#broadcasts
Next you'll be telling me a Bill of Rights was added within 12 years, or that more States joined.

You seem very assured in assuming others are dumb. I imagine it gets you far.Oh I bet you're just overflowing with knowledge and proud...not that I can't guess what you know about the Bill of Rights.![]()
I'm not so easily discouraged. Meaningful change through conventional politics is what allowed the rest of the advanced countries to get rid of their health care/insurance systems like the US now has & get pretty good health coverage to all their citizens. Not to use what little power each of us has to advance such a cause would be unthinkable to me. And conventional politics was what got women the vote, eliminated slavery, produced what pro-environmental, worker safety & social services laws we do have.and yet the majority of Americans have been consistently shown to be in favour of health care reform, in fact there´s a plurality for a public option that actually greater than the margin of Obama´s victory.
If a system is so owned by corporate interests that a newly elected president can´t do something that the public is for, when his party controls both chambers of congress, then meaningful change through conventional politics is dead.
you´re basically saying, ¨fine, let´s just abandon the country to the business elite, accept that they run things and get on with our lives¨
I think refusing to vote is abanoning the country to the business elite. They have recieved many election setbacks over the years & can be resisted in the political process, even though they have huge power within the system.
