The Swamp – A Disgruntled Voter’s Take on Politics

Why can't we elect a business woman?

I'm all about girl power. I actually puzzled over how to express that before writing what came naturally. Businessperson just doesn't sound right.
Maybe that's what the Dems should have done this time out. I definitely favor Hillary over Palin so far as female politicians are concerned, but I hope that doesn't come across as an outright diss. Though she is a bit rough around the edges, Palin gets a bad rap. As media scrutiny intensifies, flaws are getting harder and harder to gloss over, and novices are apt to get skewered no matter how careful they are.

jimmy you know just as well as i do that people take advantage of the health care system now but there a number of us - me included that cant afford health care as it is. its hard to swallow that if i get in a serious accident or have a condition - i could be financially ruined for life. at least they are presenting a solution as imperfect as it is that can be tweeked. why shouldnt we have universal healthcare? i work hard as hell and still cant afford it.

I can't afford healthcare either, bro, but under this plan that means I'll be one of the folks who get penalized on their taxes. A lot of people think the plan provides healthcare to those who don't have it at no charge, but that's not the case. You have to have healthcare or you will be penalized. Now, the plan is designed to make this healthcare more affordable, but that remains to be seen. My biggest fear is that in the end the insurance companies will turn out to be smarter than the government and this expensive plan will fail to alleviate the burden it is designed to attack. I'll take about this more in the coming piece, and I'll even tell you how insurance companies are already preparing to take advantage of loopholes in the framework that has been presented.

well the way we have it now is completely broken. so how long do you wait to try something else?

The main problem I have with the concept of small government / big freedom is whenever something catastrophic happens, like the banks fail or the housing market crashes, or BP spills their shit all over the goddamn ocean, everyone asks "why did this happen? Why didn't the government put more regulation on these companies?"

You want a small government, but want companies to be ethical.It doesn't work that way.
The fact that we have oil spills and housing crashes should give you satisfaction, and or proof, that our government already yields a fairly unpowerful hand, or at the least is easily bought off. If we were actually anywhere close to socialism, as implied, then our companies would not be allowed to run amuck in exploiting our workers and running to the least regulated country to produce our products.

You cant have your Ron Paul cake and eat it too. Less regulations = more company power. Personally, I will take the system I can actually vote in, which inevitably is under more scrutiny and is looked at with a bigger media microscope.

It is hilarious to me that this diet republican, aka Libertarian, rhetoric is gaining any kind of momentum. It is easy to get votes when guaranteeing legalized marijuana, all the while minimizing government programs, kicking out immigrants and telling the homeless to find a job.

I will take smoking weed illegally for awhile, in exchange for human rights.
and to me, Healthcare is a human right.

See, that's just the thing, T. I'm a big fan of the idea of universal healthcare, and I'm all for trying to make it a reality. However, I think we would be better served by working long and hard to ensure what we enact is the best possible plan we can come up with. Putting forth a lousy initiative that is already being trailed by a lengthy "fix-it" bill may turn out to be a big step backward. I have always hoped that someone would take office and try to make this a reality, I just never dreamed anyone would be so foolhardy as to try and do it overnight. I also think this is greatly detrimental to us as a nation at present because we are in the midst of what many economic minds have already dubbed The Great Recession. I know the prez sees universal healthcare as his legacy, but right now our economy should be the top priority. Additionally, a prosperous economy would alleviate a lot of the problems this healthcare plan is supposed to address. Our healtchare system hasn't really changed that much in the last decade, but nobody was talking about a "healtchare crisis" when jobs weren't so hard to come by.
It's an interesting argument, to be sure, and I wouldn't be so turned off by the current administration if I thought they were going about this in anything that even remotely resembled a logical fashion. What's happening now is far too divisive, and the people at the controls are moving far too quickly. What's the old proverb about haste? I would hate to waste this opportunity.

you gotta look at the setup too. right now the dems (barely) had enough to get it thru - if they waited a year more on it then that might not be the case with the elections coming up this year. the timing for this president had to be now or probably not at all.

i say lets get this rolling and as it needs to be tweeked, we tweek it. of course, i am biased as i dont have health insurance and neither does almost everyone that works with me.

I think a good plan could overcome partisan politics. Also, I truly believe everyone who thinks they are going to wake up one morning and have healthcare they didn't have before is in for a rude awakening. Lastly, I value logic. Whenever there's an issue to be dealt with and the person in charge throws out a lame plan and assures everyone involved that we can patch things up later if it doesn't work out, I'll always be the first one to raise my hand and say "Why don't we just come up with a better plan now?" Attacking any significant problem with a faulty plan doesn't compute for me.
I have said on numerous occasions that I don't believe we can truly consider ourselves a progressive nation until we find a way to provide healthcare to those who don't have it. However, I'm not willing to sign off on a rush job that may cripple any chance of that idea becoming a reality for generations to come. Such a transition could never be accomplished quickly and easily, and while many of us may be hoping for just that, those hopes are ill-founded.
JP, I guess the portion of this story that pertains to the importance of discussing politics without feeling an overpowering need to label anything you disagree with was lost on you. Until you stop thinking in terms of labels, it's going to be very hard for you to have a meaningful discussion with anyone you disagree with. The people you interact with can have a wealth of opinions without affiliating themselves with any party or group. Even if someone agrees with some of the core principles of a group or party, if you simply relate their views to those of the group or party in question, you're going to miss out on the differences that make their views unique. Additionally, I do think equating the notion of limiting the scope of a bloated government with some sort of corporate hell is a bit much. There are always degrees. A smaller government would still be capable of regulating a vast array of services and organizations.

Alan Grayson Honors The Dead http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV9TRoYMtjs&feature=player_embedded

I want to commend all of you for working so hard and being so strong at helping the whitehouse and congress begin to address our U.S. and Global healthcare crisis. You have been AWESOME! my fellow Americans and peoples of the World. America and the World is better and safer for it. My greatest pride is the knowledge that I am one of you. And that you really get it. You really understand the importance of it all.

There are some potentially very good things in the healthcare legislation. Especially with the reconciliation fix’s. The Democrats, Bernie Sanders and the Whitehouse did a GREAT! job of fighting to produce the best healthcare legislation that they could. They have earned all our strong support. And we should give it to them.

But it was your relentless pressure and hard work that made the difference. Whatever good comes from this healthcare legislation, America and the peoples of the World will have each of you to thank. You were smart, creative, courageous and relentless. You fought together for the best legislation possible. And when you had to, you fought alone. No matter who stumbled and fell you continued to push and forge ahead. Fighting for the lives and health of the American people and the World. YOU SHOULD BE PROUD OF YOUR-SELVES :-)

It may come to pass that future generations will look back on us and say that we were ALL Americas Greatest Generations. And that healthcare reform was our finest hour. You should be proud of our leaders President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and the many other Democratic and independent fighters for the people in congress. They proved them-self worthy of the leadership of a GREAT! PEOPLE.

But we are not done yet. This was just the beginning of healthcare reform, not the end. WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, ARE NOT! divided on healthcare legislation. The vast majority of you have been consistently crystal clear that this legislation does not go far enough. You want a strong Government-run Public Option CHOICE!! available to everyone on day one. And you want it NOW!

YOU MUST NOT ALLOW AN INDIVIDUAL MANDATE TO STAND WITHOUT A STRONG GOVERNMENT-RUN PUBLIC OPTION CHOICE! AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE.

WE THE PEOPLE have been crystal clear that we want an end to dependence on for-profit healthcare and the for-profit proxies called private for non-profit healthcare. The American people want the CHOICE! of a strong Government-run Public Option to replace their need or dependence on healthcare providers whose primary motivation is profit. Rather than providing the highest quality, easiest accessible and most affordable medically necessary healthcare possible. This is what the rest of the developed World has. And the American people want it too. They want healthcare ASSURANCE! Not, for-profit health insurance. And they want it NOW!

Now is the time to continue the push for a strong Government-run Public Option CHOICE! available to everyone that wants it on day one. Rationally it’s clear what we have to do to get this done. SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATS that supported you with a Public Option choice, and REMOVE as many republicans as you can. Not one republican in congress was willing to step across the isle to support a strong Government-run Public Option CHOICE!! available to everyone on day one. NOT ONE! Let no candidate prevail this November that does not support a Strong Government-run Public Option.

47,000 AMERICANS die each year from lack of healthcare. 120,000 die from treatable illness that don’t die in other developed countries. Hundreds of thousands of you are dieing from medical accidents in a rush to profit. And Millions of your are injured. Millions more are driven into bankruptcy. All for the privilege of paying two to three times as much as any other people in the developed world for healthcare. HOGWASH!

Additionally, tens of thousands of you and your children were killed and millions sickened and injured from a terror attack with H1N1 (swine flu). Released on the American people and the World by the for-profit healthcare industry. All in an attempt to panic and frighten you into accepting the oxymoronic criminal enterprise of private for-profit healthcare (The most costly, deadly, dangerous, and disgraceful product sold in America). H1N1 is still sickening people and killing them. Especially children, the young and the middle aged. And there will be a third wave. These are the terrorist you need to worry about the most. Even the so-called international terrorist would not do something so INSANE! But greed driven medical profiteers would and did.

Apparently as far as republicans in GOVERNMENT are concerned, YOU! my fellow Americans – CAN JUST DROP DEAD! Including their own family members. Fools!... Hundreds of thousands of you, and possibly millions of you will die from the long-term effects of your infection and poisoning with H1N1.

So my fellow Human Beings. Rest-up, Take good care of the basics (Balanced nutrition, hydration, exercise, rest and POSITIVE emotional supports). Then wade back into the FIGHT! for a strong Government-run Public Option CHOICE! available to everyone on day one. Drug re-importation, Abolishment or strong restrictions on patents for biologic and prescription drugs. And government controlled and negotiated drug and medical cost. You must take back control of your healthcare system from the Medical Industrial Complex. you MUST do it NOW! This is a matter of National and Global security. There can be NO MORE EXCUSES.

God Bless You My Fellow Human Beings. I’m glad to know of you. And proud to be one of you.

See you on the battle field.

Sincerely

jacksmith – WorkingClass :-)

ok. there u go.

Wow. Yeah, just wow.
What else is there to say?

Keep it coming.

This is one of the most uninformed, least researched rants I have ever heard. It's hard to know where to start.

"for the time being at least, this community organizer fellow is a big fan of Socialism"
I don't think you know what this word means. It would be great for you to ask an actual Socialist what Obama is; any self professed socialist will make it clear that Obama is a capitalist. Industry regulation is not socialism. And I'd like to point out that the fire department, police department, roads, sidewalks, and your clean water are all run by the state and are therefore SOCIALIST.

"Do we really need those innovators who have turned the DMV and The Post Office into such marvels of modern ingenuity running healthcare?"
Neither Obama nor the current democrats are responsible for the "modern ingenuity" of the DMV or Post Office. You should do a little research here; in actuality the Post Office IS a marvel of modern ingenuity. Their efficiency goes up every year and their relative expenditures go down. The DMV is run on a state-by-state basis with little intrusion by the federal government so it's a great example of what you claim to want.

"When has hurrying ever improved a critical decision? Why are planning and foresight so unnecessary to the success of a plan?"
The Democrats have been attempting reform of healthcare ever since Nixon and Kaiser decided that healthcare should be about profits, not providing healthcare, and the republicans have been blocking any attempt at reform whatsoever the entire time. This is not a new fight, and to treat it as some new idea that Obama & Co just came up with belies ignorance of the issue at hand.

"no concessions of any merit were made to the Republicans."
This statement alone shows your extreme bias and lack of knowledge on the issue at hand. Just to start:

* Using undercover patients to root out fraud in Medicare and Medicaid (an idea suggested by Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma);
* Tripling the funding for state experiments in medical malpractice reform;
* Increasing physician reimbursement rates for Medicaid (as requested by Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa);
* Clarifying that high-deductible insurance policies will be available through the new insurance exchanges (a response to a plea by Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming to stop trying to kill health savings accounts).

I can't believe we published this shit on rvamag.com. It's a regurgitation of Glenn Beck by someone who doesn't really understand the subject matter and didn't bother to attempt any research whatsoever.

I apologize to anyone who bothered to read this.

I dont agree with him but the article is exactly like the title says - its his opinion.

I'm all for opinions, I just wish Jimmy had one of his own, not what right-wing radio told him to think. For someone who claims to be an independent, his blog is a depository of neo-con tea party vitriol with no attempt at balance whatsoever. He's an independent the same way that Beck, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly are- pigs with lipstick.

Edit- Sorry, I thought the link was to his blog, not the image source. My last comment is rescinded- at least the "his blog" part. I still maintain that he presents no original or researched opinions.

-Universal healthcare is a socialist staple. A leader who does what he thinks is best for the people even they don't agree is adopting a socialist approach.
-I am not nearly as impressed by the DMV and The Post Office as you are. I have spent much of my life doing bulk mailings for a printshop and I interact with the post office on a regular basis. Let me repeat: I am not nearly as impressed as you are.
-Also, the notion that this same plan has been being tweaked for years so that it could be unveiled in 2010 is untrue. Yes, Democrats (and some Repbulicans since so many are apparently incapable of discussing issues like this without picking a side) have been working on universal healthcare for some time, but this is a new proposal with a lot of new ideas and it was put together very quickly. Additionally, the timeframe for making the transition is a bit hasty in my opinion. Also, if there are reports out there where experts in the field have evaluated this plan and the transition in question, I have yet to see them. I have seen some reports from economic experts that are rather troubling, but I'll touch on that in the next column.
-I didn't say that there weren't concessions made, only that there weren't any concessions of merit. I don't think any of the alterations you note had Repubicans rushing to join the Dems in support of the plan. I'm sure that if you ask any of the leading Republicans their thoughts, they will assure you that this has not been a bipartisan process.
-Lastly, Glenn Beck amuses the hell out of me. I may have watched ten minutes of his program in my lifetime.
Regardless, I thank you for your comment, Ian, and your apology to anyone who hates reading another person's opinion is a nice touch. The more dialogue we have, the better. That's how opinions and ideas are shaped and formed, and I'm always interested in hearing what someone who is willing to take the time to think about a situation believes. The freedom to express such ideas, no matter how contrary or outrageous they are is one of the great things about this country.
Anyone who wants to believe that this these president is a champion of democracy is free to do so. Anyone who thinks this plan is the product of 30+ years of research and development can buy into that if they like. Those who feel that the Republicans were embraced with open arms and given a powerful voice in the formation of this plan and the subsequent vote have that right.
And, of course, if some guy formulates an opinion on what's happening in Washington today that doesn't mirror your own, go ahead and call it shit if you so desire.
The more Americans who speak their mind the better, though I do hope for a day when more of them can do so without feeling the need to choose a side and embrace the company line. Look, love it or hate it, there are noble points and flaws in this proposal. If you think it's a good idea, that's fine, and if you think it's a terrible idea, that's fine too, but anyone on either side who thinks it's a black and white issue should have their head examined. There are talking points to spare and no one should be condemned for taking a closer look and deciding how they feel.
Again, I appreciate the commentary. Keep it coming.

Damn, Ian, slow down. I don't listen to right-wing radio. I don't pay any attention to any of the personalities you have alluded to. I think we're going to have to have a chat about my views on the media some time so you can focus on the argument at hand. Whether you like my column or not, I can assure you that everything you've said about my political bearing and, in particular, my media preferences is totally false. There's nothing I hate more than one-sided media and I steadfastly ignore such programming. Disagree with the column all you like, but please don't lump me in with these alleged influences that I have no stomach for. This is a polarizing issue, to be sure, and one of the handicaps therein is the idea that the opposition consists of close-minded zealots standing under an elephant banner. There are plenty of people, like myself, who don't like this plan, but that doesn't make us die-hard Republican blowhards. I strongly suggest that people try not to judge someone's entire political make-up on a divisive issue as that's always going to yield mixed results at best.

For as much of a liberal based magazine/ website that RVA is 95% of the time... its nice to at least hear something from a different point of view.

Jimmy said:

"See, that's just the thing, T. I'm a big fan of the idea of universal healthcare, and I'm all for trying to make it a reality."

SOCIALISTTTTTTT!!!!!!!! BURN THE SOCIALISTTTTTTT!!!!11!!!!!!111111

And I dont even know what to make of JackSmiths rant?

I would love to hear why, exactly, you feel so inclined to refer to Obama as "the community organizer"? Do you have some kind of disdain for those trying to improve their communities through these activities? Could not most of the tea party leaders be considered community orgainzers? You don't mask your contempt for Obama very well, and using such a phrase comes across as, well, played out. Who gives a shit that he was a community organizer? Do you refer to Bush as the GM? Clinton as the saxophonist? GWB as the pilot? Reagan as the actor? I enjoy your other writing for the sharp commentary. this piece was just dull. It added nothing new to the conversation that anyone who listens to(or tries to avoid) talk radio hasn't heard already.

"Universal healthcare is a socialist staple. A leader who does what he thinks is best for the people even they don't agree is adopting a socialist approach."
No, it's not, it's a staple of every other first world nation. Just like everyone else shouting "ZOMG SOCIALIST" you simply don't know what the word means (or don't care). Broadly defined, socialism is public or direct worker's ownership of means of production. Universal healthcare can be provided while the healthcare system remains private. Universal healthcare *can* be socialist, but more often than not it isn't, and the proposed system here in America is not. Regulation is not socialism, no matter how much you want it to be.

"I am not nearly as impressed by the DMV and The Post Office as you are."
Who cares if you're not impressed? The points I made about both systems- the Post Office being a documentable marvel of efficiency and the fact that the DMV isn't run by the federal government- still stand, and you made no attempt to disagree with me so I assume you concede the point. You're blaming Obama for the DMV, I suppose tsunamis are also his fault.

Most of the base changes to our heathcare system- the elimination of pre-existing condition denials, dropping patients on technicalities whenever they get sick or actually NEED their insurance- are the same changes that have been proposed time and time again. Methods and fine print change, of course, but the base notion that our healthcare system needs reform has been rejected time and time again with the exact same reasoning as you present here- it's rushed, we need to do it right (not right now), blah blah blah. I never claimed that the reforms presented are perfect, and of course they can be tweaked, but you're reiterating the same arguments that the right wing has been presenting for 30+ years while claiming that you're not. I never claimed you were a hardcore republican; just that you're making all of their arguments. If it walks like a duck, you know?

The article above reiterates everything being said by rank-and-file right wing media and to believe that you came to these opinions without encountering, patronizing or courting right wing media is ludicrous and disingenuous. Perhaps it wasn't radio; I guess it was the ridiculously biased and hate-filled blogs like the one you got your image from. I know that all of these sources, tea party people and the like claim to be an independent, grassroots movement of free thinkers, and that is complete horse doo-doo.

I appreciate opinions as much as the next person does, and of course RVA Magazine has always been defined by controversial opinions and people. But we've also constantly been defined by original opinion and thought, none of which is represented here; this is regurgitation.

To be honest I think you and I probably agree on more than is apparent here; healthcare is a hot issue and I (as someone who has been completely and totally taken advantage of and left by the healthcare industry) have a firm opinion of. As someone who doesn't have healthcare, it's probably impossible for you to know what it's like to be denied care that your doctor prescribes even when you've already paid for it. You and I might share a lot of opinions, and obviously this is not one of them.

I think some of my comments are MIA here, but Ian has obviously read them. I basically offered my thoughts on his key points and let him know that I don't patronize any of the media outlets or personalities he refers to. I would liken his efforts to paint me as a mouthpiece for right-wing zealots to current efforts to link fiscal conservatives to racists and homophobes. Such tactics only underscore the point I was trying to make in the article about choosing sides. Once you adopt that logic it's practically impossible to hear an opinion without deciding which group you're going to lump that person in with. It's a convenient way of debasing anything you don't really want to grapple with as propaganda.
I should probably do a piece on my views on the media sometime soon so that he can see just how ludicrous his conviction that I've essentially plagiarized my own opinion is. Incidentally, congratulations on achieving omniscience, Ian. It's something I've always strived for.
John, the truly important question is this: is jacksmith being sincere or is he yanking our collective chain? I'm hoping it's the latter.

When I read all of the liberal/progressive stuff illustrated above,I am glad
I took a defensive gun course.

Ryan, to be honest I don't like this president much at all. Being a community organizer is terrific, but it's not presidential resume material. I know he also made a big speech at an opportune time, but I dislike him because he won the office by lying out his ass and presenting himself as an agent of change. If people weren't so desperate for hope in these trying political times, they would have seen WonderBoy for what he is: a con artist. In political terms, he promised the world on a silver platter. Give that man ten terms and he will never accomplish half of what he convinced so many people he could achieve.
Obviously this piece is tongue-in-cheek, but I believe my portrayal of a man lost in the White House is a lot closer to reality than I would honestly like to believe. I'm definitely not a fan, and 'm not alone in this regard. For the record, I haven't liked many of our presidents. I'm a big fan of America, but when we elect someone to public office, I frequently ask myself "Is that really the best we can do?" A lot of my dislike for government and the players involved stems from the way our democracy has been twisted over the course of time. In point of fact, Mark Warner may be the only politician I have ever voted into office who made legitimate promises and delivered on them, and I've voted a lot of guys into office. I'm always surprised that more Americans aren't personally offended by much of what happens in Washington and the very culture that defines our political epicenter.

This is my last comment today, I think, but I'm glad so many of you are sharing your thoughts. Obviously this community doesn't really embrace my opinion, but it's still a healthy exchange. The last thing I would like to point out is that I think it's unfair to dispute the president's socialist bearing with textbook definitions of socialism or examples from governments with a socialist imprint. Any president with socialist leanings wouldn't be able to achieve true socialism, our framework wouldn't permit that. However, that doesn't mean you couldn't have a president with such leanings who could try to steer us in that direction. I doubt anyone thinks that the prez could or would stage a vote and transform our democracy into a socialist state, but I'm not alone in seeing Socialist ideas in his platform.

"it's unfair to dispute the president's socialist bearing with textbook definitions of socialism or examples from governments with a socialist imprint."
This is one of the funniest things I've ever read, and you've made it quite clear that you don't care what socialism means. You might as well claim that Obama is a white supremacist.

"I'm not alone in seeing Socialist ideas in his platform."
People also think that Elvis is still alive, that the earth is 5,000 years old, and that tomatoes are poisonous.

Curt:

http://rvamag.com/articles/full/1820/gun-toting-liberals-other-inherent-...

My final comment for the day- James Wayland, you and I and Reinhold should go fishing & shooting together.

RVA's headline for the article on my untimely death: Columnist Perishes In Tragic Accident During Sporting Expedition With Fellow Staffers.
My preference for a body that isn't ventilated and a long and healthy life aside, I would be up for such an adventure.
I stand by both points. I deal in ideas. I guess I believe they shape reality and not the other way around, but I could be wrong.

The big problem I have with any moderated "opinions" (by which I mean opinion columns in professional publications) is the old cliche: people are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts. Professional organizations should not publish opinions that state clearly contrary-to-fact falsehoods. If news organizations would take this one simple step, we could cut out at least 50% of the noise and misinformation and finally get to the real debate. There are real issues worth debating for all sides of this, but the majority is misinformed rubbish that has nothing to do with reality. And then professional news organizations have the nerve to wonder why they're becoming irrelevant.