2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhen Bernie Met Hillary-Long before challenging Clinton, Sanders reached out to her. He got nowhere
Last edited Wed Feb 3, 2016, 05:18 PM - Edit history (1)
Fascinating Read By BEN SCHRECKINGER - about healthcare, NAFTA and more. Recommend reading the whole thing.
. . .
In 1992, the lone socialist in Congress, Rep. Bernard Sanders, as he was then known, wasnt wild about the centrist Arkansas Governor running for president, and he let it be known publicly. Bernie was the founder of the progressive caucus. Clinton was the founder of the Democratic Leadership Council, the whole point of which was to exterminate the progressives, said Bill Curry, who served as counselor to the president during Clintons first term. They werent even two ships passing in the night. They were two ships sailing in the opposite direction.
But in May of 1992, Sanders wrote to the First Lady of Arkansas at her Little Rock law firm to tout a bill he had written to provide federal funding for state cancer registries, attaching his testimony on the bills behalf and a Readers Digest article calling registries THE CANCER WEAPON AMERICA NEEDS MOST.
<snip>
<snip>
They got their meeting at the White House that month, and the two doctors laid out the case for single-payer to the first lady. She said, You make a convincing case, but is there any force on the face of the earth that could counter the hundreds of millions of the dollars the insurance industry would spend fighting that? recalled Himmelstein. And I said, How about the president of the United States actually leading the American people? and she said, Tell me something real.
<snip>
At the time, Sanders was a vocal opponent of the administration-backed North American Free Trade Agreement, which the House approved in November.
<snip>
By the time Sanders arrived in the Senate in 2007, Hillary Clinton was already gearing up for her first presidential run, though the two did find opportunities to join forces during their two-year overlap in the upper chamber. In 2007, they co-authored the Green Jobs Act, which funded renewable energy and energy efficiency programs and passed as part of a larger energy bill. They both served on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee, and in July 2008, along with Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy, the pair co-sponsored the Access for All America Act to expand the availability of primary care medicine, which died in committee.
More . . . http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-119082
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)corrupted by Big Money. The Clintons have always been on the wrong side of this class war.
Response to Nanjeanne (Original post)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)Are you telling me we should then support the TPP because they oppose it? There ARE times when Conservatives and Liberals find common ground. Frankly, why should we be obligated to bail out foreign countries?!
Mike__M
(1,052 posts)to kicking kittens; therefore, we are morally obligated to support kitten kicking.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)Nanjeanne
(4,961 posts)With the moral support of the Heritage Foundation, Sanders led the bipartisan opposition in 1998 to the Clinton Administrations plan to infuse the International Monetary Fund with $18 billion to bail out the economies hit by the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which Congress ultimately rejected.
And aren't we supposed to be all about bipartisanship. Especially when it's in opposition to a bailout.
And what the hell do you think the ACA is? It's the Heritage Foundation's healthcare plan.
Your outrage is a bit odd.
Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #6)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)He said that his plan "...wasn't all that much different..." than the '90s plan put forth by the GOP.
Should I believe him or you?
Response to zipplewrath (Reply #11)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)The ACA was The HF plan. Yes, it has additions and modifications, but it basically was the starting point. And that starting point was intended as an alternative to Hillary Care and was intended to insure that the Insurance industry would always remain in charge. The only substantive difference of any consequence was the Medicaid expansion and that one was shot down big time such that the end result was a mere 5% increase in insurance coverage, half of which were already eligible for federal assistance in the first place. With the Medicaid expansion it might have gotten to 7% or so.
Response to zipplewrath (Reply #14)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
white_wolf
(6,238 posts)If you don't know single payer is different from Obamacare then there's no point in talking to you.
Response to white_wolf (Reply #29)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)The Medicaid expansion is a few percent at best. That is 90%+ away from single payer. That is a HUGE distinction and difference.
Response to zipplewrath (Reply #39)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Nanjeanne
(4,961 posts)EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)People forget how many lobbyists Obama surrounded himself with.
cali
(114,904 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)labor activists, peace activist, and environmental activists.... all members of a coalition called 50 Years Is Enough which worked and agitated against the IMF's austerity agendas. It is this organization that provided the moral support to Barney Frank and Bernie Sanders; that the Heritage Foundation found themselves on the same side of labor rights activists (but not for all the same reasons) was a fluke.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)Even a stopped watch can be right twice a day.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)Bookmarking for later.
JudyM
(29,251 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 3, 2016, 05:12 PM - Edit history (1)
Bernie was the founder of the progressive caucus. Clinton was the founder of the Democratic Leadership Council, the whole point of which was to exterminate the progressives, said Bill Curry, who served as counselor to the president during Clintons first term.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)SunSeeker
(51,571 posts)Sure he worked in the Clinton administration, as did thousands of other people, but he could hardly hold himself out as a Clinton confidante. His claim that the "point" of the DLC was "to exterminate the progressives" is false and just part of his stated mission to get Sanders to go after Hillary regarding "to what degree she means what she says" but without making it look like a "character assassination." (See above link.) In other words, he urged Sanders to resort to the old Republican meme of calling Clinton a corrupt liar, but not use those exact words. Judging by how negative the Sanders campaign has gone, sounds like the Sanders campaign is following his advice.
It is not surprising that Republican - owned Politico turned to Bill Curry for a quote for their Hillary hit piece.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)We're seeing them now crawl out from under the woodwork, the Entrenched Cushy Elite Establishment, to shill for Hill.
If you hear them shill'n, then they are bad for the 99%.
bvf
(6,604 posts)This should be required reading--thanks for posting.
geardaddy
(24,931 posts)Thanks for posting!
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)It's interesting to see the long term perspectives of both Hillary and Bernie in this article.
Thanks for the link!
SunSeeker
(51,571 posts)Note to Sanders: the President does not get a magic wand.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)Given that most people hate health insurance companies, that shouldn't be hard.
Incrementalism will never work without a clear vision of where you want to go. Bottom line is thqt Clinton thinks that health care should not be a human right.
Nanjeanne
(4,961 posts)It's we the people. Like women got the vote, like civil rights, like ending the Vietnam War.
It's not being afraid. It's using your voice. It's demanding your Congress do what the people want. It's electing the brave people. It's not giving in to the power and corruption in government.
It's your President using the bully pulpit to educate and inspire the citizens.
It's a Political Revolution.
Or we can sit on our asses and let them throw us a crumb while they pick our pockets.
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)Hillary on single-payer then:
"You make a convincing case, but is there any force on the face of the earth that could counter the hundreds of millions of dollars the insurance industry would spend fighting that?"
Shorter today:
"Single-payer will never, ever happen."
And yes, "How about the president of the United States actually leading the American people?"
Well.... *crickets*
Because we don't have LEADERS in the US. We have corprat and Wall St. puppets who put up an apparently believable pretense of being leaders. But they're not. And they haven't been for a LONG time.
Revolution? Yes. Because We the People (the 99% - not the corporate ones) want A LEADER. Not corprat puppets.
There you go.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)Money is her God.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)Tell me something real.
NO WE CAN"T