The gap between "You have the right to buy health insurance" and "You have the right to health care"

[Bonobo]

is precisely equal to the gap between Hillary's and Bernie's commitment to human rights.

Nor is it limited to health care. You will see the same difference represented in their approach to both killing and losing soldiers as well as to damage to people due to bad trade deals, and on and on.

[onecaliberal]

1. Very good points.

It demonstrates what the candidates truly stand for.

[Skittles]

2. I think "affordable health insurance" sounds ridiculous

if it was truly affordable, you would not need subsidies

[Bonobo]

3. And I think Hillary's "Everyone has the right to..." is ridiculous.

If everyone "has the right", then why the fuck is it dependent upon purchasing health insurance from a private for-profit company?

That is not what "rights" are.

So either shit or get off the pot, Hillary.

In other words, either stop pretending that you think it is a "right" or continue to call it a "right" and actually advocate for it AS IF IT IS A RIGHT.

[Skittles]

4. so Hillary has never advocated for....what?

[Bonobo]

5. Oh, sorry, I thought you guys didn't like to dwell on the past.

Is she advocating for it now?

[Skittles]

6. what exactly do you mean by "YOU GUYS"?

seriously, please explain that to me

[Bonobo]

7. Perhaps I misunderstood.

I was left with the impression that you were telling me, in effect, that Hillary DID advocate for...something. I don't really know.
Your post was cryptic.

I thought you were a Hillary supporter and that is what I meant by "you guys"

[Skittles]

10. I have not supported Hillary since her vote for IWR

you really need to check your Hillary hysteria

[Laura PourMeADrink]

22. Lordie - this exchange was as close to an inquisition as I have seen.

If you, heaven forbid, had been a Hillary supporter - I suspect it would have gone
on much longer.

Obama originally advocated for universal coverage but was advised it was not filibuster proof. And, despite democrat control, the ACA we ended up with barely got through.

Now, unless something changes, they control. Given this. and the fact that Repukes probably wanted to jump out of a window with the recent SC decision, I really fail to see how anyone could move this mountain no matter how much they advocate.

So, I think the real question is, did the passage of ACA, with all it's flaws, benefit society in the short term enough to stick us in a place where getting back to universal is a complete non-starter? Or, should Obama have at least tried knowing he would fail?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

41. ACA has put us all in a better place IMHO

More needs to be done, of course, but we can't do anything much until we have the numbers in Congress (or in state legislatures) to change things more. I also don't believe that having ACA cements anything and does not prevent anybody from moving further once there is sufficient public and, more importantly, political momentum, to do more.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

47. Maybe it doesn't "cement" but you have to agree - it's not a logical flow

whatsoever. If we had passed a public option instead, say, for a segment of society somehow...a more logical flow would be to rally to expand that to all.

Unfortunately, just can not think of a "hook" on this. You would somehow, have to convince every one that we would be better off as a country financially, if we just paid for everyone who is currently on ACA coverage to get universal coverage. Which is not possible since ACA coverage participants are paying now.

Republicans - the "I-don't-give-a-shit-about-other-people-who-can't-see-a-doctor" people should totally be rejoicing over this.

[sabrina 1]

14. Not to mention that we shouldn't need insurance.

Govt run HC is far less expensive. And what do these Health Insurance Corps contribute to people's actual health? They manage money, they dip into Public Funds now taking about 20% of Medicaid funds, a dream come true for them though they want more, simply by 'handling' the funds before the go to actual patient care.

When the Govt runs Medicaid the overhead is 3%. So just so some Corps can make a profit it is costing 20% or more, rather than 3% of tax dollars.

There has to be a National HC system in this country. So many are without or cannot afford to use the insurance they are paying for because of the high deductibles. What a scam it all is.

[Hoyt]

8. Can't wait to hear how Sanders will get that through today's Comgress, or in the forseeable future.

I agree with him in the abstract, but there is no way he can deliver. I think Clinton can get us closer to what is best.

[Bonobo]

9. Hillary is not even claiming she will try.

She is all about protecting the ACA. There is not even the slightest indication that she will try for more.

And I disagree with you about getting it trough the congress.

It maddens me that people, including yourself apparently, do not see the obvious. That ANY movement, although the outcome is never sure, MUST begin with advocacy. And the power of the president as an advocate is unmatched.

Accepting the lesser will, in fact, result in getting the lesser.

[Hoyt]

12. I would love to see evidence that Sanders has gotten major legislation through Congress.

Advocacy is nice, but it means nothing if you can't deliver, or in this case even get elected.

I'd love for most of the things Sanders advocates to materialize . Since I don't think it will happen under Sanders at this time, I'm not willing to set us back two decades believing in him. If he captures nomination, I'll support him.

[Bonobo]

13. Once again, backwards.

"Advocacy is nice, but it means nothing if you can't deliver,"

Delivery is nice, unless what you are delivering is not what is needed, or by delivering it, you preclude the possibility of further advancements.

But actually what needs to be said to you, clearly, is that Sanders was not the President before, so his ability to convince congress of his plan or some other arbitrary metric is pointless.

Are you able to point to something that Obama pushed through congress when he was a senator? What about Hillary?

Was Hillary's failure to deal with Health Care both as a First Lady and then as a senator a clear signal that she could get nothing done as president? No? I didn't think so.

[A Little Weird]

18. +1000000 n/t

[bettyellen]

40. The ACA was desperately needed, incredibly popular and does not preclude anything.

What planet are you posting from where universal healthcare gets through congress? That's ridiculous.

[sabrina 1]

15. He will benefit from having ignited so much enthusiasm among

so many people they are now also focusing on Congress. He KNOWS a president cannot do it alone and has repeatedly said so. First he wants to create and is succeeding, a political revolution because you are correct, the way the system is rigged right now, it will take millions of Americans and a Congress elected by them, to stop the corruption and to get good legislation passed.

So this isn't just to elect Bernie, it is to kick out those who work for Corporations because Congress is supposed to work for the people, and replace as many as possible.

It is clear this has already begun, with voters refusing to hold their noses in the last two mid terms, but supporting Progressives, finding and supporting new progressive candidates, and doing what we did in 2008 and when that happens this time, with someone who is not beholden to Corporations, things will be very different in terms of how he handles a Dem Congress and Senate.

[Cosmocat]

20. Fantasitcal

And, while this will fall on deaf ears, this is NOT about Bernie.

HE is not the issue.

This is the same shit people who have thrown BHO under the bus did 6 years ago.

Get caught up in the moment and think a cult of personality was going to change it all.

You are living in a complete fantasy world if you think the seas in congress are going to part for Bernie if we managed to get past the stupid and elect hiim.

Republicans will be 100 percent opposed to him just the same as any other democrat.

33% or so of Dems in safe districts will support and back progressive policy.
33% or so of Dems in toss up districts will be wishy washy and unreliable in the clutches.
33% of Dems in really tough districts will be Blue Dogs.

How he "handles" congress will have jack all to do with it, they will do what they do, look out for their own skins.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

24. You are being much too pragmatic and realistic !

[Cosmocat]

30. Jesus

I actually have come behind Bernie pretty solidly, I just can't tolerate the hyper fantastical thinking.

IF he gets to 1600 Pennsylvania, he is going to deal with the same shit of a different flavor that BHO has, what ANY democrat will.

[Bonobo]

25. Here's what you don't get. Ready?

Any Dem will face EXACTLY THE SAME amount of kickback whether they go 25%, 50% or 100% to the left.

EXACTLY THE SAME. It's politics.

Obama tried bi-partisan and got kicked in the teeth.

When will you learn?

Might as well go for 100% so you can get 75%.

Obama started at 50. That's what Hillary will do. If we're lucky.

[Cosmocat]

29. Nothing to "get"

This "IF HE HAD JUST WANTED IT MORE" stuff is throw him under the bus pouty bullshit.

Nothing he could have said or done would have changed how anyone in congress acted during ACA.

Rs would have voted to a man and woman against it.

The safe democrats would have maybe made a little more noise about single payer.
The toss up dems would have broke one way or another like they did.
The blue dogs would have voted against it.

You are truly living in a fantasy world if you think congressmen like Heath Shuler would have magically voted for single payer when they didn't even vote for ACA.

You are truly living in a fantasy world if you think Max Baucus, bought and paid for by the insurance industry a decade earlier, would have even allowed a single payer bill to come in the senate.

ACA fucking barely passed by reconciliation and was a pubic hair from being dismantled by the supreme court just last week, but we would have single payer today if he just wanted it enough?

We will be LUCKY if we manage to keep these assholes from dismantling ACA in the next couple of decades, much less any positive steps in health care reform much less getting single payer.

It is all fine and well that Bernie comes balls out for it, and that is OK. But, it is high minded talk, JUST LIKE BHOs talk of everyone being adults in DC was high minded talk.

Again, I know this will fall on deaf ears.

I like Bernie, am voting for him and will support him. I just don't have any tolerance for this bullshit of throwing BHO under the bus or even the trolling on Hillary. Yeah, she is warmed over, but she put blood on the floor a quarter century ago actually TRYING to get some progress on health care form.

Lots or reasons to choose Bernie over her from a policy standpoint, and again, I know this will be lost on you, but end of the day she has actually DONE more to try to get us to a better place than Bernie.

[Bonobo]

31. Defeatist. Sigh. nt

[Cosmocat]

35. lol

Yes, its my fault this country is chock full of stupid.

We both want the same thing.

My objection is to throwing good democrats under the bus.

BHO has been a darn good president, taken relentlesss shit from the right and media and as is the case with democrats been left hanging by his party - see throwing him under the bus.

Hill is warmed over, I get it. But, not being a fire breathing progressive like Bernie does not make her bad.

We can fight the good fight for good progressive policy while understanding that the country is too god darned stupid to be the best it can be and get behind the pols like BHO and Hill who can operate in the actual world of politics that we live in.

In this regard, the repubilcans kick our ass every time.

They want even crazier right wing stupidity, but fight the long game a LOT better than we do.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. Extremely well said !! Agree with every word ! nt

[Kalidurga]

16. It's funny you are all certain that Sanders congress will be the same as today's congress.

And that the boots that are on the ground are going to give quarter to their elected officials after working to get them in office. See, we are going to do our damnedest to return the power of congress to the people instead of corporations. The government that has been bought by the 1% will eventually be returned to where it belongs.

[Hoyt]

17. I agree. . . . . .eventually, not next year or next cycle.

[Cosmocat]

19. Then you find reality amusing

It will be a miracle if we simply overcome the stupid to the point of getting him elected.

You are living in a fantasy world completely disconnected from the United States of America if you think this country is going to have anything other than what exists in congress right now over the remainder of our lives.

This is the same shit people who have now thrown him under the bus did with BHO.

Get carried away with the moment and think something was going to miraculously change because of him.

[Kalidurga]

39. But it won't be because of just him.

He is telling people to get involved and that is the key difference. We can't just vote for someone and then expect a miracle. We have to hold our reps accountable. That is what he is asking for as much as he is asking for a vote. He wants to change America back to We the People.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

23. post #22

[marble falls]

11. Good points! K&R!

[mmonk]

21. While I really don't doubt it, where are the numbers drawn from?

[Sunlei]

26. one of them should just say it,"Copy one of the other first world countries who provides healthcare

for all"

cut out the profiteers totally and save trillions in OUR Federal and State taxpayers money that goes to profits for all the 'middlemen'.

[brooklynite]

27. Maybe Clinton's position is informed by history and reality...

...having actually TRIED with Bill Clinton to introduce Universal Healthcare, and encountering limited political support. Bernie Sanders can advocate for it as much as he wants to, but conditions haven't changed any.

[Bonobo]

28. Okay with you if we vote for someone that at least will advocate for a health care system

like the rest of the world?

[brooklynite]

32. YOU'RE welcome to vote for him...

I will vote for the candidate who won't lose to the Republicans and allow them to pull back on what we already have.

[Bonobo]

33. I am genuinely worried that Hillary will lose as well.

I've never seen someone as divisive as her and I have been following elections closely since 1980.

[brooklynite]

34. I'm generally not...

...Will some people "never vote for Hillary"? (I mean, besides the people here). Probably, but they weren't going to vote for the Democrat anyway, and even factoring that in, she comes out ahead of every Republican opponent in almost every poll. You supposition seems to be that Sanders will encourage a new base of voters from the left to substitute, to which my reply is: "that's what they said about Howard Dean". Bottom line, the majority of votes are still in the middle, not the edges.

[LWolf]

37. This just makes me sad.

Truly.

When good Democrats vote for candidates out of fear, instead of out of hope and determination to move positive change forward, it makes me sad.

It doesn't matter who the candidate/s are. It doesn't empower us, it weakens us.

[LWolf]

36. $950 a month for my premium.

That's more than my son's mortgage payment, with taxes and insurance included.

Who has money for the $1500 deductible and 20% copay after that? Not me.

[mmonk]

38. Freedumb.

[bettyellen]

42. Do you have worse coverage or a higher price for the same?

[LWolf]

43. The coverage is the same.

It just gets increasingly more expensive. The premiums, deductible, and copays have all gone up.

[bettyellen]

44. Yeah, it's been ridiculous but I tell you, the fear of not having it gets worse as you get older.

I freelanced for almost half my career without it and am glad I can at least pick up some catastrophic if I do again. The rules they have against coverage out of state are bullshit too. They really have to change that.

[2banon]

45. What You Said!