Susan Sarandon is a wonderful actress and activist. Jane Hamsher is a wonderful activist but right now she's acting badly. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
Seriously, I’ve always liked her, but this is the problem when one issue predominates over all others. Whether it’s abortion or healthcare or anything else, if you allow one issue to control your thinking you lose perspective.
On the other hand, I don’t see Jane Hamsher going full-bore neo-con on us anytime soon. This too shall pass.
I think that Hamsher is very vocal, and it is her right, but sometimes it can be taken too far. The Senate HCR bill is not perfect, but it is a start. I think people don't attempt to understand how difficult it has been to get anything done in the Senate since Obama became president. I also don't think they understood that when Obama said he was going to let Congress craft the bill,he meant it. Although I wanted either single payer or a robust public option, I realize that not compromising can be a death knell to moving toward any type of HCR.
I think folks who maintain that the Senate "HCR" bill is a "start" have the responsibility to point to ANY piece of thoroughly fucked-up SOCIAL legislation in THE LAST 30 YEARS--i.e., since the Bidness Coup engineered by the Raygunauts--to which the Congress has actually returned, and which the Congress actually "fixed."
I'm not talking Medicare of Social Security. They're products of another 'generation' of legislators, before 'gaming' the system became a popular and lucrative practice by the GOPukes (mostly)...
SHow me a piece of shitty SOCIAL legislation that Congress returned to to make it more just, or fairer, or more inclusionary?
Woody, was there any significant piece of social legislation enacted in the last 30 years, other than tax cuts and, uh, “welfare reform”? (Oh, I suppose the ADA and the 1991 amendments to the Civil Rights Act count – but actually, those two were decent laws and didn’t really need “fixing” …)
Dave: You mentioned "the end of welfare as we know it," which would be as good a place as any to start.
But what about NCLB, or the Bankruptcy act of '06 (wherein Pres. Shamwow certified his loyalty to the status quo), or the Clenis' Comm Act of '96....The PATRIOT ACT, which Prez Shamwow himself pledged to revisit and make less draconian. Did you know you could be prosecuted for advocating a general strike?
Woody, aside from No Child Left Behind, I wouldn’t call any of those things “social legislation,” as in, legislation that was designed, or purportedly designed, to advance social welfare. The USA PATRIOT ACT and the Bankruptcy Reform Act were designed for the opposite purpose altogether – to scale back rights and liberties that were already in place. In fact, as to USA PATRIOT, the underlying rationale was that we were supposed to sacrifice fundamental liberties in the name of security. (Take that, Ben Franklin, you mealy-mouthed, anti-American, terrorist-loving socialist!)
But your reference to NCLB is quite on point; as your and my citation of Clinton’s odious “welfare reform” … which he promised to “fix” if he got reelected. So, yes, I agree that most of the time we can’t, or won’t, go back and fix broken legislation. As far as the health care bill is concerned, I’m just not so sure we’d get a better bill if we jettisoned this one and started over; so it may not be a matter attempting to fix this bill so much as getting what we can now even if we can’t improve it later. I may well be wrong about that, I admit. I just don’t know.
But I still wouldn’t shake hands with Grover Norquist! (I was going to say, “I still wouldn’t get into bed with Grover Norquist” … but that image is just too disturbing, even for me.)
Susan Sarandon is a wonderful actress and activist. Jane Hamsher is a wonderful activist but right now she's acting badly. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
ReplyDeleteCome back to us, Jane!
ReplyDeleteSeriously, I’ve always liked her, but this is the problem when one issue predominates over all others. Whether it’s abortion or healthcare or anything else, if you allow one issue to control your thinking you lose perspective.
On the other hand, I don’t see Jane Hamsher going full-bore neo-con on us anytime soon. This too shall pass.
I think that Hamsher is very vocal, and it is her right, but sometimes it can be taken too far. The Senate HCR bill is not perfect, but it is a start. I think people don't attempt to understand how difficult it has been to get anything done in the Senate since Obama became president. I also don't think they understood that when Obama said he was going to let Congress craft the bill,he meant it. Although I wanted either single payer or a robust public option, I realize that not compromising can be a death knell to moving toward any type of HCR.
ReplyDeleteI think folks who maintain that the Senate "HCR" bill is a "start" have the responsibility to point to ANY piece of thoroughly fucked-up SOCIAL legislation in THE LAST 30 YEARS--i.e., since the Bidness Coup engineered by the Raygunauts--to which the Congress has actually returned, and which the Congress actually "fixed."
ReplyDeleteI'm not talking Medicare of Social Security. They're products of another 'generation' of legislators, before 'gaming' the system became a popular and lucrative practice by the GOPukes (mostly)...
SHow me a piece of shitty SOCIAL legislation that Congress returned to to make it more just, or fairer, or more inclusionary?
Woody, was there any significant piece of social legislation enacted in the last 30 years, other than tax cuts and, uh, “welfare reform”? (Oh, I suppose the ADA and the 1991 amendments to the Civil Rights Act count – but actually, those two were decent laws and didn’t really need “fixing” …)
ReplyDeleteDon't tell Sparky, but I hope she hooks up with me.
ReplyDeleteDave: You mentioned "the end of welfare as we know it," which would be as good a place as any to start.
ReplyDeleteBut what about NCLB, or the Bankruptcy act of '06 (wherein Pres. Shamwow certified his loyalty to the status quo), or the Clenis' Comm Act of '96....The PATRIOT ACT, which Prez Shamwow himself pledged to revisit and make less draconian. Did you know you could be prosecuted for advocating a general strike?
Woody, aside from No Child Left Behind, I wouldn’t call any of those things “social legislation,” as in, legislation that was designed, or purportedly designed, to advance social welfare. The USA PATRIOT ACT and the Bankruptcy Reform Act were designed for the opposite purpose altogether – to scale back rights and liberties that were already in place. In fact, as to USA PATRIOT, the underlying rationale was that we were supposed to sacrifice fundamental liberties in the name of security. (Take that, Ben Franklin, you mealy-mouthed, anti-American, terrorist-loving socialist!)
ReplyDeleteBut your reference to NCLB is quite on point; as your and my citation of Clinton’s odious “welfare reform” … which he promised to “fix” if he got reelected. So, yes, I agree that most of the time we can’t, or won’t, go back and fix broken legislation. As far as the health care bill is concerned, I’m just not so sure we’d get a better bill if we jettisoned this one and started over; so it may not be a matter attempting to fix this bill so much as getting what we can now even if we can’t improve it later. I may well be wrong about that, I admit. I just don’t know.
But I still wouldn’t shake hands with Grover Norquist! (I was going to say, “I still wouldn’t get into bed with Grover Norquist” … but that image is just too disturbing, even for me.)
Merry Christmas Fran.
ReplyDeleteBusted
Ah, the fine art of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. Easy to do when you can't see past your own tunnel vision obsession.
ReplyDeleteMerry Christmas, Fran!
ReplyDeleteMy only question is: "What did Susan Sarandon do to deserve this?" I love her!
ReplyDeleteBAC