Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
geez, so much for talking about the actual bill. now we're off in some surreal paranoid alternate reality complete with good old fashioned john birch society-style BUT THE GOVERNMENT IS OVERRUN WITH COMM-U-NISTS idiocy, metaphysical statements about the "lost freedom in america" which presumably had something to do with keeping 30 million people without access to health care....by what logic 30 million people not having insurance meant that the right could imagine itself living in a land of freedom, i have no idea. i see alot of handwaving in the direction of crackpot interpretations of the constitution which i assume are to function as figleafs over this basic matter--two days ago the right was free, now they live in some imaginary despotism. all thats really changed is the enactment of a modest-to-weak version of health care reform.
so it has to follow that the ultra-right defined freedom itself around the fact that 30 million people did not have access to health insurance.
this must be what qualified as this delusion of ""tough but reasonable"....
as if this wasn't enough, there's a spate of limbaugh-specific red-baiting concerning the seiu, which presumably has replaced acorn at the center of reactionary grouphate for the time being.
it's pretty amazing stuff, this phase of collective dissociation.
|
OK roachboy... your quick-to-slander demagoguery is once again like clock-work. It seems you may also be a fan of "rules for radicals". If not, you should give it a quick read, you're a natural
I would expect to see this type of a response from a participant, not as a moderator. IMO, these roles often appear blurred, but (hopefully) not purposely divisive.
I don't believe anything I've said is typical (verbatim) of the fringe corner you tend to quickly paint folks in. I believe you, as with dc_dux, are much too invested ideologically to be tolerant or objective. The same with the conservatives that also regurgitate their herd-speak. This thread reads like a Media Matters or Media Research Center seminar.
Points
have been made regarding details. And they are often managed (as in your post) with with the intent to ridicule and deflect, while entertaining yourself and the like-minded with tired stereotypes. I'd say your response fits nicely with your description of "reactionary grouphate". As in countless other threads where the bobble-heads are suddenly presented with a different perspective, vigilance is maintained by quickly isolating, mocking and marginalizing the "target" (adversary).
Fine, play the game. However, the relationships of power and influence I presented
do exist. But I think you already know this. It's not in your best interest to entertain such whimsy.
If persons and organizations operate openly in the arena of politics, the people will adopt or choose an ideology they trust. Open discussion, discourse, conducted honorably within a procedural framework... where ever that leads, the destination should withstand scrutiny. But this is not how the heath care bill, stimulus, cap and trade, and climate legislation were crafted. Some of the groups I mentioned had significant influence in both the language and purpose of the legislation.
There was no transparency, and the associations of influence from these groups is highly suspect. If you truly believe otherwise, then we will never agree. However I'm fairly confident you know exactly what I'm talking about.
---------- Post added at 01:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:05 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
Are you really shocked that there's a vast progressive conspiracy to bring about progressive political goals? Why do these diagrams mean anything?
I guess the answer to the question posed by the op is that there is damning evidence in the form of diagrams from the internet which provide proof that health care reform is part of some vast conspiracy whereby ostensibly progressive people and organizations work with ostensibly progressive politicians to subvert The American Way under the guise of enacting ostensibly progressive goals.
|
I believe if you honestly look at these groups, the people behind them, and the level of input to the legislation, you would see a the scale of influence from these entities. You may be happy with that. If so, be blissful in your assessment.
I responded to a question about my assertions of power political influence in the crafting and promotion of the health agenda. The charts represent actual structures behind these relationships. This is the just the organizational mapping. It gets more unseemly as you drill down to the individuals, their history and affiliations, and relationships with the administration and Congress. But again... if you are comfortable knowing all this... then enjoy your "free" healthcare.