The Atheist Communist Caliphate Made Flesh, Spread the Clusterfuck Around Thread

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/joe-lieberman-not-the-man-he-used-to-be-on-medicare-buy-in.php

Meet Joe Lieberman, Medicare buy-in advocate. It's the winter of 2000, and Lieberman is pressing flesh and kissing babies in Bangor, Maine as the presidential election approaches. After holding a town hall meeting with voters at Bangor's opera house on Main Street, Lieberman, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, sits down with the local paper to discuss the upcoming election and his ticket's plan to improve the nation's health care system by allowing some younger Americans to "buy in" to the government run program. As his running mate, Al Gore, has been doing on the trail for weeks, Lieberman talks up the value of a buy-in, eloquently arguing that it's a great compromise way to get incremental health care reform past members of Congress wary of a robust health care reform bill.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/222762

The latest trouble started after Lieberman said on Fox that "as a matter of conscience," he would filibuster any health-care bill with a public option. Flashback: when he ran for reelection in 2006, Lieberman bragged about his MediChoice plan. It would "allow anybody in our country to buy into a national health-insurance pool like the federal-insurance pool we federal employees and members of Congress have." That sounds suspiciously like—ahem—the public option. What's changed?

...

... For Lieberman the only principle at stake is his stake in looking principled.

To conservatives. Lieberman doesn't care how liberals view him. He's given up on them after all the mean things they've said. Some of his oldest supporters voted for Ned Lamont in Connecticut's 2006 Democratic primary! Unforgivable! He's technically an independent and still votes for some liberal things because he wants to get reelected in 2012. But Joe's heart is with the right.

TPM again...

It's not clear exactly when the Lieberman of 2000 turned into the Lieberman of Dec. 14, 2009, but it looks like it wasn't too long ago. In a Sept. 8, 2009 interview with the Connecticut Post, Lieberman outlined his opposition to a public option but suggested a way coverage could be expanded without one:

Reform should also include malpractice reform and health exchanges, which would offer different plans for varying costs and coverage for individuals or small businesses, he said.

Lieberman added that he supports mandating that no one can be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions and that everyone be required to have health insurance.

As to how 47 million uninsured will afford coverage, Lieberman said only 12 million don't have insurance because they cannot afford it.

By allowing citizens who are not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid to buy in for a rate below the private market, the government can extend coverage to more of those who are currently uninsured, he said.

To arrive at his position, Lieberman said he reached out to "every conceivable group" in the state, including residents, providers, doctors and hospitals.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/video-watch-lieberman-endorse-medicare-buy-in-three-months-ago/

Here's some video of  Joe Lieberman only three months ago appearing to endorse the Medicare buy-in idea — in seeming contradiction of his decision to bail on the Senate deal.

...

In the vid, Lieberman appeared to go further than the current Senate deal, which would expand Medicare to those aged 55-64, saying he supported the idea of expanding it to people aged 50 and over. Lieberman referenced his proposal along these lines during the 2006 campaign, and added:

"My proposals were to basically expand the existing successful public health insurance programs Medicare and Medicaid...

"When it came to Medicare I was very focused on a group — post 50, maybe more like post 55. People who have retired early, or unfortunately have been laid off early, who lose their health insurance and they're too young to qualify for Medicare.

"What I was proposing was that they have an option to buy into Medicare early and again on the premise that that would be less expensive than the enormous cost. If you're 55 or 60 and you're without health insurance and you go in to try to buy it, because you're older ... you're rated as a risk so you pay a lot of money."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/lieberman-no-need-for-medicare-buy-in-because-baucus-bill-was-so-good.php

"I didn't change my mind," Lieberman insisted. "I've been in this position for the last few weeks."

[Internet Apex]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/joe-lieberman-not-the-man-he-used-to-be-on-medicare-buy-in.php

Meet Joe Lieberman, Medicare buy-in advocate. It's the winter of 2000, and Lieberman is pressing flesh and kissing babies in Bangor, Maine as the presidential election approaches. After holding a town hall meeting with voters at Bangor's opera house on Main Street, Lieberman, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, sits down with the local paper to discuss the upcoming election and his ticket's plan to improve the nation's health care system by allowing some younger Americans to "buy in" to the government run program. As his running mate, Al Gore, has been doing on the trail for weeks, Lieberman talks up the value of a buy-in, eloquently arguing that it's a great compromise way to get incremental health care reform past members of Congress wary of a robust health care reform bill.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/222762

The latest trouble started after Lieberman said on Fox that "as a matter of conscience," he would filibuster any health-care bill with a public option. Flashback: when he ran for reelection in 2006, Lieberman bragged about his MediChoice plan. It would "allow anybody in our country to buy into a national health-insurance pool like the federal-insurance pool we federal employees and members of Congress have." That sounds suspiciously like—ahem—the public option. What's changed?

...

... For Lieberman the only principle at stake is his stake in looking principled.

To conservatives. Lieberman doesn't care how liberals view him. He's given up on them after all the mean things they've said. Some of his oldest supporters voted for Ned Lamont in Connecticut's 2006 Democratic primary! Unforgivable! He's technically an independent and still votes for some liberal things because he wants to get reelected in 2012. But Joe's heart is with the right.

TPM again...

It's not clear exactly when the Lieberman of 2000 turned into the Lieberman of Dec. 14, 2009, but it looks like it wasn't too long ago. In a Sept. 8, 2009 interview with the Connecticut Post, Lieberman outlined his opposition to a public option but suggested a way coverage could be expanded without one:

Reform should also include malpractice reform and health exchanges, which would offer different plans for varying costs and coverage for individuals or small businesses, he said.

Lieberman added that he supports mandating that no one can be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions and that everyone be required to have health insurance.

As to how 47 million uninsured will afford coverage, Lieberman said only 12 million don't have insurance because they cannot afford it.

By allowing citizens who are not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid to buy in for a rate below the private market, the government can extend coverage to more of those who are currently uninsured, he said.

To arrive at his position, Lieberman said he reached out to "every conceivable group" in the state, including residents, providers, doctors and hospitals.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/video-watch-lieberman-endorse-medicare-buy-in-three-months-ago/

Here's some video of  Joe Lieberman only three months ago appearing to endorse the Medicare buy-in idea — in seeming contradiction of his decision to bail on the Senate deal.

...

In the vid, Lieberman appeared to go further than the current Senate deal, which would expand Medicare to those aged 55-64, saying he supported the idea of expanding it to people aged 50 and over. Lieberman referenced his proposal along these lines during the 2006 campaign, and added:

"My proposals were to basically expand the existing successful public health insurance programs Medicare and Medicaid...

"When it came to Medicare I was very focused on a group — post 50, maybe more like post 55. People who have retired early, or unfortunately have been laid off early, who lose their health insurance and they're too young to qualify for Medicare.

"What I was proposing was that they have an option to buy into Medicare early and again on the premise that that would be less expensive than the enormous cost. If you're 55 or 60 and you're without health insurance and you go in to try to buy it, because you're older ... you're rated as a risk so you pay a lot of money."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/lieberman-no-need-for-medicare-buy-in-because-baucus-bill-was-so-good.php

"I didn't change my mind," Lieberman insisted. "I've been in this position for the last few weeks."

I don't have time to read all that shit. What happened?

[R-V]

I don't have time to read all that shit. What happened?

Joe Lieberman is a penis.

[Internet Apex]

I don't have time to read all that shit. What happened?

Joe Lieberman is a penis.

Thanks.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

I don't have time to read all that shit. What happened?

Joe Lieberman is a penis.

Thanks.

Joe Lieberman is a penis and he's been it that position for at least the last few weeks.

[R-V]

Nate Silver on Droopy and the Gang vs. the public option/Medicare expansion:

At the end of the day, negotiations are about leverage, and in this case, the ConservaDems had almost all of it. Why?

Firstly, because a bill without a public option still does a world's worth of good from a progressive standpoint, providing in excess of $100 billion per year in subsidies to the disadvantaged to help them procure health care.

Secondly, because the public option is considerably more popular in progressive districts than in ConservaDem ones.

Thirdly, because the health care bill has become fairly unpopular overall. Whereas for a moderate or liberal Democrat, a vote for health care is nevertheless a slam dunk, the more conservative Democrats have to weigh a nay vote that would really hurt their party nationally versus an aye vote that could potentially harm them personally.

Fourthly, because money talks in politics, and corporate campaign donations tend to push policy toward the center-right, and the ConservaDems tend to be especially reliant on corporate contributions.

Fifthly, because progressives do not have a history of behaving "irrationally", and so attempts to refute the above logic are not credible.

Sixthly, because the threat to use reconciliation is only minimally credible -- it could be done, but the bill that emerged could easily be worse from a progressive standpoint than a bill passed under regular order without a public option, and the attendant political fallout would be damaging to all Democrats.

This is a very difficult set of circumstances to overcome. Perhaps not impossible -- if Joe Lieberman weren't such a prick, for instance, maybe it could have been done. But very, very tough. I see neither a strategic failure on behalf of progressives, nor "enabling" behavior on behalf of moderates**, nor bad faith on behalf of conservatives. Nothing was yanked away from progressives -- they set a very high bar, worked their butts off, and just barely failed to clear it.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Republicans totally get the internet...

http://gop.am/

"GOP.AM » Making Long URLs... Conservative"

Just remember, no lewd lude content:

Terms of Use:

GOP.AM was created as a free service to make posting long URLs easier. If you use it for spamming, illegal purposes or to promote lude content, your GOP.AM URL will be disabled. This service is provided without warranty of any kind.

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/12/gop-removes-conservative-url-shortener-following-pranks/

The Republican party took down its innovative link shortening tool Tuesday after pranksters had a field day using the tool to associate the GOP with bondage sites.

Conservatives generally advocate a minimalist approach to certain areas of government. One wouldn't necessarily expect them to extend that approach to the web links, but that's exactly what the Republican National Committee did with GOP.am, a URL shortener designed to facilitate the exchange of links to web pages of interest to conservative web surfers.

Almost immediately after it launched yesterday, pranksters began using the service to link to controversial or ironically-intended websites such as the official site of the American Communist Party, a bondage website and a webpage advertising a sex toy in the likeness of Barack Obama. GOP.am started blocking such links apparently at some point Tuesday morning, and the GOP.am homepage is now offline.

Possibly the first branded URL shortener (Google also launched its own URL shortener yesterday afternoon), GOP.am was designed by the R.N.C.'s new media consultants, Political Media, to work somewhat like bit.ly in that it shortens URLs so that they can be more easily exchanged via short messaging services like Twitter.

But unlike bit.ly, GOP.am includes a toolbar at the top of the screen that follows the user as they click through to see whatever page the link goes to, and an animation of Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele walking around on the lower right as if he's showing off the website — particularly awkward when that website is the alt.com bondage site. Users of the Balloon-Juice website entertained each other last night by exchanging scores of such links, which have since been blocked.

The toolbar includes branding for the G.O.P., links for re-propagating the link on Twitter, Facebook and other sites, and a "donate to the G.O.P." button. Political Media, whose other clients include Republican candidates, think tanks and the House of Representatives Agriculture  Committee's Republican minority according to a Political Media spokesman, designed it with right-wing users in mind, but was apparently unaware that it could be hijacked in this way.

Who could have predicted?

http://twitter.com/toddeherman/status/6680251605

A GOP URL Shortener: http://gop.am/gopurl/remote Use It And Anger Liberals! #tcot #goptech

I'M SO ANGRY!

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Somehow this one still works (for the time being)...

http://gop.am/XSNy



I'm literally ANGERING out loud.

[BH]

I don't get the audience the GOP is trying to attract with their URL shortener.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

I don't get the audience the GOP is trying to attract with their URL shortener.

Are you kidding? It's "the coolest thing in internet advocacy in a LONG time"...

http://twitter.com/lward99/status/6514506432

[BH]

I don't get the audience the GOP is trying to attract with their URL shortener.

Are you kidding? It's "the coolest thing in internet advocacy in a LONG time"...

http://twitter.com/lward99/status/6514506432

It's a service though right? It's not really a new medium.. what a bunch of IDITOS.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/12/gop-removes-conservative-url-shortener-following-pranks/

The toolbar includes branding for the G.O.P., links for re-propagating the link on Twitter, Facebook and other sites, and a "donate to the G.O.P." button. Political Media, whose other clients include Republican candidates, think tanks and the House of Representatives Agriculture  Committee's Republican minority according to a Political Media spokesman, designed it with right-wing users in mind, but was apparently unaware that it could be hijacked in this way.

Update:

The toolbar includes branding for the GOP, links for re-propagating the link on Twitter, Facebook and other sites, and a "donate to the GOP" button. Political Media, whose other clients include Republican candidates, think tanks and the House of Representatives Agriculture  Committee's Republican minority, according to a Political Media spokesman, designed it with conservative users in mind.

Political Media's Ward told Wired.com he saw the pranks coming a mile away (updated). "Believe me, we were well aware that this was going to happen," he said. "We've been on the internet doing business for every aspect of it since 1996. I was well aware exactly what was going to happen."

I can't believe I fell into his carefully constructed trap.

So. Much. Angry.

[Internet Apex]

I don't have time to read any news right now, but I think Howard Dean might be a penis.

[Oleg]

I don't have time to read any news right now, but I think Howard Dean might be a penis.

Yep.  A man who's worked his whole life to bring more affordable health care to the poor is the penis for suggesting that this bill, which will not bring more affordable health care to anyone, may not be worth voting for.  I'm sure the penis is NOT the sell-out who mere months ago was advocating a medicare buy-in, while now changing his mind and being against it, just so he could grab whatever power his rotting soul will allow him.

[CT III]

I don't have time to read any news right now, but I think Howard Dean might be a penis.

Yep.  A man who's worked his whole life to bring more affordable health care to the poor is the penis for suggesting that this bill, which will not bring more affordable health care to anyone, may not be worth voting for.  I'm sure the penis is NOT the sell-out who mere months ago was advocating a medicare buy-in, while now changing his mind and being against it, just so he could grab whatever power his rotting soul will allow him.

Someone's been using the GOP's URL shortener.