Skip to main content

Polis/Pingree/Grayson

This past week, 3 progressive heroes in Congress stepped up to the plate and worked with grassroots groups to create huge momentum behind the public option. 

Those heroes are freshmen Reps. Alan Grayson (D-FL), Jared Polis (D-CO), and Chellie Pingree (D-ME).

When progressives are bold, they deserve our thanks. Can you chip in $2 to each of their 2010 campaigns as a sign of appreciation? Click here.

Over 1,000 2,100 people have chipped in so far!

UPDATE: Thanks for all the recs, folks. Please keep them coming so others see.

The PCCC and DFA sent out emails this morning describing what these bold progressives did. From our PCCC email:

Alan Grayson personally helped deliver our public option petition to top senators. He joined the PCCC, Democracy for America, and Credo Action to deliver 225,000 petition signatures to Harry Reid and others. This received big media coverage. See video of the delivery here.   

Jared Polis & Chellie Pingree embraced the message of our petition and rallied over 100 fellow House Democrats to join them on a letter calling on Sen. Harry Reid to pass the public option through "reconciliation," which only needs a simple majority to pass the Senate.

The PCCC, DFA, and Credo put in thousands of calls to House Democrats asking them to sign this letter -- while MSNBC, CBS, ABC, Huffington Post, and others reported on the momentum.

These freshman Democrats showed courage at a time when many top Democratic leaders are in paralysis. They are exactly the kind of bold progressives we formed the PCCC to help elect.

Can you join thousands of others and chip in $2 to each of these progressive House members' 2010 campaigns? Click here.

Note: If you have not yet signed the petition in support of the public option through reconciliation, you can do so here.

Thanks for being a bold progressive.

Polis/Pingree/Grayson

Originally posted to AdamGreen on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 09:25 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (126+ / 0-)
  •  Adam: Nancy Pelosi says the PO won't be a (7+ / 0-)

    part of the reconciliation package. Is she right?

    •  Ultimately (15+ / 0-)

      It's not up to only her.

      It's up to Senate leaders to put it in. It's up to the entire Democratic Caucuses who will have to vote to approve both the Reconciliation bill and the Senate bill.

      And it's up to the 115 House members who signed the letter demanding the Senate include it. If they chose to not vote for a Reconciliation bill without a public option, then the Senate has to include it to get the job done.

      That's where we come in.

      We must keep the pressure up on them to act. And we must support the Healthcare Heroes that are leading the fight. The more we build the momentum and reward real leadership... the more incentive there is for Democrats to do the right thing and pass the most popular piece of reform.

      Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

      by Charles Chamberlain on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 09:41:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  they didn't demand the Public Option (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Elise, yoduuuh do or do not, davekro

        they reiterated their support for it:

        http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/...

        it didn't even make the bullet list.  given what is possible with reconciliation, i can't imagine any of them scuttling the bill over the public option at this stage of the game.

        The problem with people who need to follow leaders is that they need to follow leaders.

        by Cedwyn on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:36:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Don't 'support' it. DEMAND it ! ! ! (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slinkerwink, cameoanne, CMYK

          Cedwyn, I agree and have been shouting this for a while now.  All I here is the echo of my (and some other's) voice come back from the void that are the head in the sand senate dems! Not all, but enough to scuttle the PO unless Obama kicks their money grubbing/ weak asses into voting for the PO in recon.  But of course, Pres Obama has been just reiterating support (read: not supporting), rather than fighting for the PO.  I unfortunately feel that he prefers the senate bill, but would be OK if it had a few good things added, but NOT the PO.  I would LOVE to be wrong. If he does not start overtly FIGHTING for the PO VERY soon (like now), to me that will be evidence of his dislike for the PO.  And coming out with a 'faux fight' at the last second, when it is obviously too late, would just be kabuki. We have had too fr!¢¢en much of that!

          Peace

          I used to have hope. Now I just see this administration's and most Dem's audacity (the impudent kind)!

          by davekro on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 11:26:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  actually, she didn't say that (19+ / 0-)

      Hey there, Slinkerwink!

      Actually, she said that it hasn't been under recent discussion. We knew that.

      We're changing the discussion...one week ago, 0 members of Congress were on the record for passing the public option. Today, it's over 115. Pretty awesome alliance between progressives on Capitol Hill and the progressive grassroots who made thousands of phone calls to make that happen.

      Hence...important to reward those who make this inside-outside mobilization possible.

      •  That's pretty much exactly what she said, (5+ / 0-)

        There was talk that there would be 51 votes for it, but it never passed on the floor of the Senate. It did pass in the House and, of course, I think it would be the way to go. But it isn't the way that the Senate went. And so I think that what you might see coming out of some reconciliation would be those areas of agreement that all three--the White House, the Senate and the House--had already agreed to...more than two weeks ago.

        Link.

        Pelosi is saying that the Senate doesn't have the votes for a Public Option and she does not expect it to be part of a reconciliation bill. Nancy Pelosi can count votes and she's aware that they simply aren't there for a public option in the Senate - through reconciliation or otherwise.

        Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

        by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:00:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  nope (10+ / 0-)

          Her saying it "never passed on the floor of the Senate" is a statement of the obvious: it never got 60 votes. We are in a 51-vote environment now, with reconciliation.

          •  Forcing every American to buy insurance w/o (10+ / 0-)

            a public option will prove to be the biggest giveaway to the insurance industry ever. Further, the penalty for not buying insurance ($750) is so low that many young people will realize that it's much cheaper to pay the penalty than insurance premiums, especially since insurers will no longer be able to exclude them due to a pre-existing condition.

            •  what does that have to do (0+ / 0-)

              with this discussion thread?

              The problem with people who need to follow leaders is that they need to follow leaders.

              by Cedwyn on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:21:22 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Did someone call the....Thread Police? n/t (6+ / 0-)
                •  it's a simple question (0+ / 0-)

                  what did your comment have to do with the thread into which you inserted it?

                  The problem with people who need to follow leaders is that they need to follow leaders.

                  by Cedwyn on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:31:40 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  HCR bargaining chips : lousy mandates vs good PO (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    slinkerwink, CMYK

                    Spud1's comment is very germaine to this diary, which is about 3 heroes trying to keep the public option alive.

                    Spud1 points out how mandates are a giveaway to health insurance companies and are bad for the American people, which is an excellent argument for our reps to deploy to bring back the public option.

                    Hey, thanks for your comment, because now I realize that the health insurance companies' side is vulnerable via mandates, which is the weakness in their case: Dems should publicly attack the mandates, which would make the public revolt and demand to bring back the PO, not only to the table, but into the bill.

                    Great idea!  Wouldn't have thought of it, if you hadn't made me notice Spud1's cogent comment by questioning whether it was applicable to this diary.

                    Thanks, again.

                    Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

                    by CIndyCasella on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 11:28:49 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Of intererst is that businesses that don't (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      CIndyCasella

                      currently provide insurance to their employees will be caught in this same net, which is why there is a lot of opposition to it from the building trades. Since they are not currently providing health insurance, even paying the small penalty for their employees they see as a tax.

            •  Say what? (0+ / 0-)

              Forcing people to buy insurance = bad, but the penalty = small. How can you complain on both ends there?

          •  but if the senate votes were there (0+ / 0-)

            we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

            The problem with people who need to follow leaders is that they need to follow leaders.

            by Cedwyn on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:20:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Unless it was a victim of "bipartisanship". (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mattman, Elise, CMYK

              Maybe Harry (Rahm?) originally threw it out in the name of bipartisanship.

              And, judging from POTUS' rhetoric lately, maybe that ship has sailed. We can only hope. (I made a funny, there.)

              "Look Ferb, there's a red herring! Lets follow it and see where it leads us!" - Phineas

              by malharden on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:28:29 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Okay then, Adam (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Elise

            Please answer this question:  The House-passed public option saves $25 billion; the House-passed employer mandate will save $100 billion.  Which is more important at the bargaining table?

          •  It never got the votes because the votes (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jim bow

            didn't exist. They didn't exist then and they don't now.

            Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

            by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:26:26 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Why (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              slinkerwink

              Why are you making this argument?

              You're not making an argument against a public option, you trying to make an argument against whether there were/are 50 votes? And I don't see how that helps.

              At Democracy for America we got 51 Senators on the record saying they'd vote for a public option. You can see the list here (this list of 51 includes Paul Kirk in MA, but you can replace him with Vice Pres Biden to break a tie).

              Further, through out the debate this fall, Senator Harkin repeatedly stated that they had at least 52 votes for a public option. And Senator Schumer repeatedly stated there were 54 to 56 votes for a public option.

              So this isn't fantasyland. These Senators may not keep their word if given a chance... but to just say they don't have the votes when there is amp evidence to the contrary is not helpful.

              In fact, it's really troll like. Which is interesting considering that your tag line asks "are you a Republican?" Perhaps, you should ask yourself.

              Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

              by Charles Chamberlain on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:08:26 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  If the coach does not demand the PO (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cameoanne, CMYK

          the team captains have no leadership to point them in the direction they should go.  Captain Pelosi has the right idea. Captain Reid... fri¢k no!  

          For the coach (Pres Obama) to say that not enough of the team wants to run the best play (PO), when he has not called for it, is rediculous!  HELLO!  Kick assistant coach (Rham) aside and give Captain Reid an ass kicking directly.  Until you do, coach, you are throwing the game on purpose! ! ! !

          I used to have hope. Now I just see this administration's and most Dem's audacity (the impudent kind)!

          by davekro on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 11:37:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Recc'd & tipped (7+ / 0-)

    Tipped ActBlue, too.  Always happy to give the thumbs up to actual Democratic leaders.

    Thanks for this diary.  That was easy.

    Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. -George Bernard Shaw

    by soyinkafan on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 09:50:24 AM PST

  •  List me the 50 Senators who are willing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CornSyrupAwareness

    to vote for a PO using reconciliation.

    I'll wait patiently...

    In the meantime, here are the votes AGAINST a PO in the Senate that I'm fairly sure of:

    Max Baucus
    Evan Bayh
    Mark Begich
    Thomas Carper
    Kent Conrad
    Byron Dorgan
    Russell Feingold
    Kay Hagan
    Daniel Inouye
    Tim Johnson
    Paul G. Kirk
    Mary Landrieu
    Blanche Lincoln
    Claire McCaskill
    Ben Nelson
    Mark Pryor
    Jon Tester
    Mark Warner
    Jim Webb

    And the only reason I'm not adding Klobuchar to the list is that Franken would be giving her cover, so it would make it safer for her to do the right thing.

    So...how do you propose to get to 50? Buy them off? Blackmail? Magic? I don't see any legal way as a possibility.

    Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

    by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 09:56:03 AM PST

    •  That's crazy (14+ / 0-)

      With due respect, that is a CRAZY list. Feingold is going to vote against the public option if it's put up for a vote? Tester? Johnson? Are you kidding?

      FDL has 51 senators on the record in the past here -- and this list misses no-brainers like Akaka, Kohl, and others who simply didn't make public statements.

      If the public option is brought up for a vote, I'm confident it would get 50 votes (plus Biden) at least...the question is: Will it be brought up for a vote? Our pressure is key to making that happen.

      •  Feingold has stated repeatedly that he does not (5+ / 0-)

        believe in using the reconciliation process for health care reform. He's said that a dozen times.

        Link.

        Congressional leadership indicate they may not need to use reconciliation to enact health care reform, that it will be used only as a last option to ensure Congress acts on that vitally important issue. That may be, and I certainly hope this body will pass a health care reform measure under regular procedures. Health care reform is long overdue, and I look forward to the Senate finally acting on an issue that is so important to my constituents. But let's not kid ourselves. It is no more appropriate to use reconciliation as a hammer to push through health care reform under regular procedures than it is to use it directly to enact those reforms. Both are abuses. Both undermine its original intent. Both invite even greater abuses in the future.

        He believes it is an abuse of the process and stands against it on principle. And there are quotes well before October of 2009 where he stated that. He was saying it back when they voted to allow the use of reconciliation on HCR. He and Byrd have been the two Democrats who have ALWAYS stood against using reconciliation for HCR. Oh, I forgot Byrd on my list above - there you go...add Byrd to the "crazy" list which isn't at all crazy.

        FDL can't count and hasn't been able to count all year, but that's beside the point. Byrd and Feingold give everyone else cover.

        Oh, I noticed that I also missed Lieberman - you should add him to the list above as well. That makes 21 who are very likely to vote against a PO with reconciliation.

        I'm sure they will be able to come up with 50 for the other agreed-to fixes that Pelosi mentioned in her quote above, but a public option simply doesn't have the support and loses conservadems and moderates.

        Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

        by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:22:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Feingold also said... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          greenearth, 1BQ, CMYK

          Feingold also said of the public option:

          "I do not support proposals that would replace the public option in the bill with a purely private approach.  We need to have some competition for the insurance industry to keep rates down and save taxpayer dollars."

          Then...he voted for that exact bill. So, don't worry about it. If there's a vote, Feingold will be with us.

          •  And yet there's no vote happening yet... (0+ / 0-)

            that's because we don't have the votes. And based on Feingold's record on crucial votes this year, he won't be with us. He's only been with us 58% of the time. Want to see something really funny? Compare that with Lieberman who has been with us 72% of the time on crucial votes.

            Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

            by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 05:42:36 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  having 50 in support of the public option (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Catte Nappe, jim bow, Elise

        isn't the same thing as having 50 willing to use reconciliation to get it.  if the senate had the votes, they'd be passing stuff as we type.

        The problem with people who need to follow leaders is that they need to follow leaders.

        by Cedwyn on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:24:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'll await all of your "Feingold is a traitor" (0+ / 0-)

        attacks...since I'm sure those must be coming now that you know his position (of course, you should have known his position on this as early as last March - which was when I became aware of it). Hell of a whip count you guys are doing!

        Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

        by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:35:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Seriously (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slinkerwink

          Elise... your attitude is one of a troll and not one of a concerned individual who's just trying to correct the record for everyone's benefit.

          If you personally are against the public option, then just come out and say it. Because clearly that's what you really mean here.

          Your made up list of people who will vote against a reconciliation bill if it includes fixes that will make it possible to pass the Senate bill through the House is fantasyland.

          If the Recon bill has a public option in it and passing a recon bill is the only way to pass healthcare reform through both houses this year, then Senators Fiengold, Baucus, Carper, Conrad, Dorgan, Inouye, Johnson, McCaskill, Pryor, Tester, Warner and Webb will absolutely NOT vote against that bill. No way. No how.

          Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

          by Charles Chamberlain on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:18:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Webb and Warner are now in a state where (0+ / 0-)

            the State Senate just voted to pre-empt the mandates. Feingold and Byrd have said from the very beginning - when reconciliation was just talk - that they did not support and would not vote for a health care bill using reconciliation. McCaskill, Johnson, Tester and Dorgan are all in tough states - Dorgan might be freed up to vote now that he's not running again, but he's never once expressed support for a public option and he's only said negative things about it in public.

            Pryor is looking at his state where Lincoln is down 20 points in every poll because she's viewed as being "too liberal" by some and "too conservadem" by others - and the "too liberal" group outweighs the other. Carper has never supported the public option and has tried to water it down from day one. So has Conrad.

            Every single one of these Senators has shown their hand more than once. I pay attention.

            You can call my behavior trollish if you don't like it - that's your opinion. But I have been stating here - and elsewhere that Feingold is against using reconciliation since March of 2009 and not ONE single person has challenged him or asked him about that position. Meanwhile, your groups have attacked solid Democrats who have a MUCH better voting record than Feingold does (go check out his score at Progressive Punch - Lieberman beats him by nearly 20% on crucial votes this year). You've attacked Bernie Sanders, Capuano, and a dozen other liberal Democrats who have great voting records, but you've all left Feingold untouched even though HIS vote in the Senate is crucial and necessary to reach 50.

            The fact is, you guys have dropped the ball in a major way. That's why I unsubscribed from your email list and it's why I unsubscribed from the PCCC's email list - and it's why I never belonged to FDL's email list from the beginning. You guys are asking people for donations and you're claiming to fight for them to get them a public option and you can't even do a proper vote count on the issue you're writing about. That's what I call falling down on the job. I've been asking people since March 2009 to whip count the Senate and I've been roundly ignored and told that I'm an insurance industry shill/whore (take your pick of the insult) because I've been pointing out that the support for the public option isn't there. Before Brown won I was counting 42 votes for a public option using reconciliation. After Brown? It's down to 39. Conservadems and moderates are running scared in the WRONG direction and they're doing that in part because of your attacks on progressives all year long and the tea party attacks on them all year long.

            Ask your members to call these Senators and ask them where they stand on a public option through reconciliation. Do the homework yourselves and you will find that I'm right. The votes are not there - and instead of whipping votes for the fix, you guys are tilting windmills at the unachievable and frankly meaningless public option because it's a symbol. Everyone has to give up something in negotiations...we're giving up the public option. If you want to know why - it's because we demanded it so loudly and made it such a crucial part of our demands that the conservadems had to kill it in order to save face at home. Many of us saw this coming last summer. I don't know why you didn't.

            Telling 30+ million people to suffer the status quo is the Republican plan. Are you a Republican?

            by Elise on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 05:41:02 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I guess... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Chi

              the difference between you and me may be that I'm fighting for what I believe in and what I want, while you're fighting for what you think you can get.

              If I'm "tilting at windmills", then I have to admit that I think your digging a ditch for the Democratic party to fall into and get buried at the polls.

              Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

              by Charles Chamberlain on Thu Feb 04, 2010 at 10:09:13 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  help us help them (9+ / 0-)

    I've called my representatives.  My COBRA deal is $935.00/mo.  That's a mortgage payment!  If someone is making 1/2 a salary on disability, who can afford that??!!  

    I need, no WE need a public option.

    Divided we fall.

    by aj2k on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:21:30 AM PST

  •  OT PCCC: Why I can't wait for HCR to conclude (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CornSyrupAwareness, CMYK

    For those paying attention to PCCC pre-HCR epic battle which the PCCC has valiantly fought for, to a level that is jaw dropping;
    The original mission statement of the PAC was to assist progressive congressional candidates run effective and efficient campaigns, using new strategies and abandoning those rehashed cycle after cycle by our out of touch stash of overpaid and sometimes incompetent dem consultants.

    I know this is OT, but Adam with Citizens United, your original mission is now 1000x more critical.

    Please keep fighting, but please help lead in proving the pundits dead wrong about 2010, or at least we "Die Trying".

    Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

    by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:33:13 AM PST

  •  Made my contribution! (3+ / 0-)

    I love ActBlue. No more giving to the DNC, who work against the very initiatives I support.

    This way we can send a message to those who work for us, without giving a free ride to the BlueDogs, the bought and paid, and their ilk.

    I hope many put their money where their mouth is and give the support our fighters need to continue actually working for the people! gasp

    I'm sure some on the Hill are having aneurysms trying to figure out their ulterior motive..."What? Where's the fat payoff? The kickback? I don't understand...are they actually...naw, impossible.."

    -3.62, -6.21 Steadfastly refusing to comment on Sarah Palin since 11/16/09.

    by Zikar on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 10:40:44 AM PST

  •  I agree with all those aho are sick of giving (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Charles Chamberlain, marzook, CMYK

    to the DNC, and we should start giving our money to progressive candidates.  Time to get rid of Dinos and wannabes who talk a good game.  

    And, for what it's worth, Sir Alan Grayson is my favorite statesman.  We need him in the Senate where he can keep those lobbysist's tools (beholden Senators) honest, or at least GUILTY!  

  •  Heh. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, Populista, CornSyrupAwareness

    Jared Polis voted against the Tri-Committee bill in George Miller's Education & Labor Committee, which contained a public option far stronger than that of the House-passed bill.  And now the Boulder Congressman is a hero?

    [Fyi, here is Rep. Polis defending his vote to me.]

    •  You win Jim! (0+ / 0-)

      You busted Adam.
      You could at least try and hide your glee.

      So can you suggest a replacement to Polis now that you outed him?

      Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

      by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:07:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sure. (0+ / 0-)

        The Speaker would be one.  She is and always will be a hero of mine.

        Barbara Boxer would be another.  She's almost always there for you when you need her to do something at her expense on the party's behalf.

        Patty Murray would be another.  Like Boxer, not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but gutsy -- usually.

    •  And this is relevant how? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      slinkerwink

      Seriously Jim Bow?

      Because Polis didn't vote for one version of a public option, he can't be a fighter for a different version now?

      If you don't want a public option, just say it.

      Because otherwise your attempts to derail grassroots momentum to get a healthcare bill through reconciliation that includes a public option and would therefore allow House Democrats to vote for the already passed Senate bill too, is not helping anyone trying to get the job of passing healthcare this year done.

      Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

      by Charles Chamberlain on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:26:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nice to see the PCCC raising money for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew

    candidates.. Rahm and I hope this continues.

  •  Look -- Adam. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cedwyn, CornSyrupAwareness

    The public option was meant as a political decoy for Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson, et. al. and Republicans so we could sneak by all the other core provisions while those people were exercising their self-righteousness over the public option.  Don't let the public option become a political decoy for liberals.

    Even as someone who supports the Senate's financing measures over the House's (i.e., the excise tax, IMAB), and is indifferent on the public option, the anti-trust exemption, and getting the minimum medical loss ratio above 80 percent, I still would favor the House bill over the Senate bill if I had to pick one bill or the other.  I wrote why earlier today:

    [T]he Senate bill was pared back in so many ways compared to the House bill just because Harry Reid had to get 60 votes on a bill.  Let me count the ways the House bill is far more ambitious and far better than the Senate bill:

    1. The Senate bill exempts large corporations who self-insure and others in the large group market (like my employer) from the community rating and the minimum benefit packages; the House bill does not.
    1. The Senate bill does not make health insurance affordable enough for older adults (3:1 age rating), and basically eliminates guaranteed issue underwriting by having the smoker rating; the House bill has a 2:1 age rating and no smoker rating.
    1. The Senate bill allows people under 30 to buy serious crap policies (catastrophic policies -- around 50 percent actuarial value) and allows those 30 and above to buy crap (60 percent actuarial value) policies; the House bill sets the minimum actuarial value at 70 percent (not that the House's 70 percent minimum is sufficient).
    1. The Senate bill has a much weaker individual mandate -- an 8 percent income exemption and much lower penalties -- than the House bill, which merely has a hardship exemption, and a 2.5 percent tax.
    1. The Senate bill's subsidies are less than that of the House bill for 133-300 percent FPL -- not that either have sufficient subsidies.
    1. The Senate envisions a much weaker Exchange than the House bill.  The Senate has state-based Exchanges, allows non-group policies to be sold outside the Exchange, and an insurance company just has to meet the minimum coverage standards, market conduct laws, etc. to get on the Exchange.  The House has a Federal Exchange, requires all non-group policies to be sold on the Exchange, and requires insurance companies to justify their rates to get onto the Exchange -- in addition to the competitive bidding.
    1. The Senate bill's employer mandate will cause hiring discrimination; the House bill's employer mandate will not, and saves $100 billion more than the Senate bill.
    1. The Senate bill allows insurance companies to offer benefits outside of the minimum benefits package (i.e., dental, eye care) on the basic, enhanced value, and premium tiers once the minimum coverage standards have been met; the House bill forbids insurance companies from offering any benefits outside of the minimum benefits package on the basic, enhanced value, and premium tiers.
    1. The Senate has "prevention and wellness" discounts, which will unfairly punish people because of their circumstances; the House bill does not.
    1. The Senate bill has no end-of-life care provision that will save Medicare billions; the House bill does.

    Let's look at the big picture and concentrate on the big questions:  Will people be able to afford the premiums?  If they can afford the premiums, will they be able to afford the cost-sharing?  Will everyone -- not just the average person -- be able to afford health insurance?  How will the risk pool on the Exchange compare to the risk pool for employer-provided health insurance?  What will the risk pools look like for plans on the Exchange?

    Those are just my $0.02.

    •  There's a reason (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      1BQ, George Pirpiris, CMYK

      That among swing voters who supported Obama in 2008 and Scott Brown in 2010, the Senate bill has 32% approval and public option has 82% approval.

      People want the public option. It's the only provision on the table that directly challenges insurance industry power. Everything else just feeds it.

      For you to call it a "decoy" is, frankly, disrespectful to most voters -- and shows that you are either ignorant of or complicit in a Democratic strategy of helping to grow corporate power. Which is it?

      It makes total sense that the House wouldn't want to follow the Senate strategy of following Joe Lieberman's lead -- which cost them Joe Lieberman's Senate seat. If Democrats are bold populists, they will win in 2010. If they aren't, and they follow your advice, they will lose big...and the policies they pass will help the big guy instead of the little guy.

      •  correction (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        1BQ, George Pirpiris, CMYK

        cost them Ted Kennedy's Senate seat.

        •  Hmmm ... (0+ / 0-)

          Universal health insurance is "standing up for the little guy."  31 million Americans will gain health insurance under the Senate bill.  Hundreds of thousands of lives will be saved.  Millions of bankruptcies will be averted.  That, to me, sounds like the very definition of "standing up for the little guy."

          I don't claim to be politically omniscent like you.  But I can tell you this:  health care reform should have been passed long before I voted for Martha Coakley 1.5 weeks ago.  That Democrats didn't come together and pass something is a good partial explanation of why the candidate I voted for lost.

          •  First (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            slinkerwink, 1BQ

            I don't think there are many people that would argue with you on whether a healthcare bill should have been passed long before you voted for Coakley.

            But for the record, it is not "standing up for the little guy" to require that the little guy buy for-profit insurance whether he can afford it or not. And if "the little guy" thinks they can't afford it becuase they would rather eat or pay rent instead, then it's not "standing up for the little guy" to fine him for it.

            Actually standing up for the little guy would be to give for-profit insurance companies a government-run competitor that lowers cost, increases services and uses market forces to keep insurance companies honest.

            Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

            by Charles Chamberlain on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:35:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well if that's the case, ... (0+ / 0-)

              ... then even the House-passed public option doesn't do enough to stand-up for the little guy as prices on the public option would be higher due to adverse selection.

              But since I've never claimed to be a populist -- just someone who believes in liberal egalitarian values -- I'll bow to those "real" populists.

      •  Really, Adam? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Cedwyn

        People want the public option. It's the only provision on the table that directly challenges insurance industry power. Everything else just feeds it.

        So requiring insurance companies to accept and renew everyone's policies, and forbid them from including prexisting clauses dousn't "directly challenge industry power?"

        So limiting insurance companies' ability to price for risk doesn't "directly challenge industry power?"

        So limiting insurance companies ability to sell only certain policies doesn't "directly challenge industry power?"

        Do you honestly believe the public option is the central purpose of this legislation?  Do you honestly believe the grandness of the Democratic Party's greatest aspiration the last 60 years (or at least one of them) is encapsulated by enacting some public option or some single-payer system?

        Frankly, your reply is disrespectful to people like this person and millions of others who have terminal degenerative diseases and whose life would be saved and/or bankruptcy would be averted if this bill were to pass.

        •  Without a Public Option... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slinkerwink, 1BQ

          Jim Bow, without a public option how is the government going to actually enforce any of those laws you're talking about?

          See, for-profit insurance companies are bad-faith players in the market. They have proven over and over and over again that they will break or work around laws.

          For example, when we outlaw Car Ins. from making rates higher for people based on where they live... insurance companies just changed their policy to making rates higher based on the number of accidents that happen where someone lives. It's a legal difference and it let's them get away with it. And that's them working around the law...

          In many other cases... insurance companies just break laws with no regard. They then fight the few cases brought against them in court with million dollar lawyers and lose sometimes, but win mostly. All in all, it's worth the expense becuase most people who get screwed don't sue.

          And there's no corporate police making sure they don't break laws, so the courts is all "the little guy" has.

          Now, with a public option in play... it puts in place a good-faith supplier of ins coverage. The government CAN'T break the law, so they don't. So with a good faith player competing for market share, the market place forces most other insurance companies to also act in good faith or lose more customers to the competitors who actually are.

          This is why one of the main slogans President Obama used when pushing for the public option was "to keep insurance companies honest"

          Get active and take action! Join Democracy for America at http://www.DemocracyforAmerica.com

          by Charles Chamberlain on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:46:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  They already admit they can skirt the regulations (0+ / 0-)

            Oldie but goodie:

            But Sarah Lueck at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities warns, and Cook seems to agree, that "an actuarial-value standard on its own" would not prevent insurers from designing packages that would attract healthier applicants and deter "enrollment by those in poorer health." "For example, insurers could offer a benefits design that omits or severely limits services needed by people with serious medical conditions, while offering richer benefits in other areas such as vision care or health-club memberships. In that way, an insurer could meet an actuarial standard while designing a package calculated to deter sicker people (by failing to cover basic services they need) and attract healthy ones." Insurers could offer cheaper preventive services without any cost sharing but cover more expensive services only after a high deductible is satisfied.

            The other compelling argument in favor of a truly public option is that by definition, it's not-for-profit. When you remove the profit motive, you're more likely to focus on providing high-quality care.

            "What value do private insurance companies provide?" - Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY)

            by 1BQ on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:55:07 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That is why ... (0+ / 0-)

              ... both the House and Senate bill limit cost-sharing variation by benefit category.  The Senate bill leaves this up to the HHS Secretary; and the House bill sets statutory limits at +-10 percent by benefit category.  The House goes even further, and does not allow gym membership, dental benefits, eye care, and any other item not included on the minimum benefits package to be offered on the basic, enhanced value, and premium tiers.  Only once a policyholder has bought the minimum benefits package at the minimum actuarial value of the premium tier (95 percent) can someone buy gym membership, eye care, dental care, etc.  That's a lot of coverage for a healthy person to buy just to get those items attractive to healthy people.

          •  That is why ... (0+ / 0-)

            ... you should read please Sec. 1313(e)(2) of the Senate bill (page 144):

            (2) PREMIUM CONSIDERATIONS.—The Exchange shall require health plans seeking certification as qualified health plans to submit a justification for any premium increase prior to implementation of the increase. Such plans shall prominently post such information on their websites. The Exchange may take this information, and the information and the recommendations provided to the Exchange by the State under section 2794(b)(1) of the Public Health Service Act (relating to patterns or practices of excessive or unjustified premium increases), into consideration when determining whether to make such health plan available through the Exchange. The Exchange shall take into account any excess of premium growth outside the Exchange as compared to the rate of such growth inside the Exchange, including information reported by the States.

            In other words, insurance companies each year are required to show and justify their rate increases to the Exchange Board.  If the Exchange Board finds these rate increases to be unjustified, and the insurance company sticks their middle finger at them, then the Exchange Board can kick the insurance company off the Exchange.  So there is a failsafe provision for insurance companies jacking up their prices.

      •  he's an insurance industry insider (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        slinkerwink

        For you to call it a "decoy" is, frankly, disrespectful to most voters -- and shows that you are either ignorant of or complicit in a Democratic strategy of helping to grow corporate power. Which is it?

        fyi.

        Tricoteuses Sans Frontières (Knitters Without Borders) has raised $1million for MSF since 2004.

        by CMYK on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:08:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm 30 years old. (0+ / 0-)

          Do you honestly believe the insurance industry -- with as many competent people as they have -- would hire a 30-year-old to blog undercover for them on the most widely-visited progressive website?

          But, no, I don't care much about whether or not the insurance industry stands to profit from this bill -- just as I don't care that much about whether or not doctors, hospitals, and other providers stand to profit from this bill.  What I care about is outcomes.  I care more about how many lives this bill saves than who does the paperwork.  I care more about how many bankrupticies are averted because of this bill than who does the paperwork.  If the health insurance industry (which I don't work in) stands to profit while lives are saved and medical bankruptcies are averted, so be it.  I will not let liberal allergies to large corporations making profits stand in the way of legislation that saves hundreds of thousands of lives.

  •  I don't know much about Polis or Pingree...but... (0+ / 0-)

    Grayson is a disgrace.

    I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long and in all places...arousing and persuading and reproaching you.-Socrates

    by The Navigator on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 11:34:07 AM PST

    •  Grayson is the best congressman (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      George Pirpiris, CMYK

      in the House.  And one of the smartest.

      We all differ in ways that matter. But we're all the same in the ways that matter most.

      by plf515 on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 11:54:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ignore them man.......... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        plf515, CMYK

        Its in some Dem's DNA to hate our own, especially the strong, the smart and the bold.

        In a time and day where a small minority of Dems are missing 1995 and 2005, or prefer Lobbyists like Dascle or his prodigy Chris Dodd who is trading his entire legacy for a few bucks, you will get these types who smear Democrats for having the audacity to stand up for the Democratic party.

        Whats funny about Navigator is he fails to mention another Florida disgrace, Wexler who quit on the job just to get paid.

        Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

        by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:00:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Um, yeah (0+ / 0-)

        Throwing insults and temper tantrums on the floor of the house...that's "leadership".

        I'll take Dems who actually do work like Feingold and Weiner to smear merchants like Grayson.

        He plays the netroots for fools...calls a few republicans names, and viola, the cash register starts ringing.  Not to mention the bogus "Paid for by Grayson for Congress" "petitions" he was circulating a few weeks ago, that did little more than capture email addys.

        Name calling is not leadership, nor is it courageous.  Anyone who donates money to this guy is a sap.

        I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long and in all places...arousing and persuading and reproaching you.-Socrates

        by The Navigator on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:26:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wow, nice job ignoring all the legistlation (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rainmanjr

          he has done.

          Turn off Fox News and Youtube and look at his legislative record.  I shouldn't have to list it, if you don't know you are ignorant, if you do know you are willfully ignorant.

          He is doing his job and if he remains a congressmen I guarantee you he will rise to leadership.

          Plus your smear on fundraising is mute, as now the SCOTUS makes his plea for private citizen donations as American as Apple Pie.

          Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

          by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:46:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's pretty moot...he's gone in November. (0+ / 0-)

            I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long and in all places...arousing and persuading and reproaching you.-Socrates

            by The Navigator on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 02:13:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I feel terribly sorry for you. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              plf515

              No different then a republican, you would vote against your own self interest over personality.

              Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

              by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 02:27:06 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well (0+ / 0-)

                Fortunately for me, I don't live in Grayson's district.

                Fortunately for Grayson, I can't vote his district.

                Fortunately for his district, he's gone in November.

                And that's to the countries good fortune.

                I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long and in all places...arousing and persuading and reproaching you.-Socrates

                by The Navigator on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 02:33:25 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Again, I feel sorry for you (0+ / 0-)

                  Crossing over to the Republicans must be a painful and embarrassing venture.

                  I won't entertain your macabre transition any further, as this site is for electing Democrats.
                  HRing you would achieve nothing and further discussion with you will simply depress my political party from uniting to serve America through elected office.
                  Your the one who will sleep tonight knowing you choose Rubio over Alan Grayson.

                  Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

                  by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 02:56:05 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Rubio? WTF are you talking about? (0+ / 0-)

                    And I'll sleep fine, thanks, no matter who is in Washington.

                    I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long and in all places...arousing and persuading and reproaching you.-Socrates

                    by The Navigator on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 03:06:50 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Must be nice to be able to tell the future! n/t (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              George Pirpiris

              We all differ in ways that matter. But we're all the same in the ways that matter most.

              by plf515 on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 02:54:29 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Telling the truth (0+ / 0-)

          about your opponents is good.

          He didn't throw "temper tantrums" he told the truth.  I realize Republicans don't like that.  Why don't you?

          We all differ in ways that matter. But we're all the same in the ways that matter most.

          by plf515 on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 02:50:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  On Progressive Punch (4+ / 0-)

    Grayson gets a 95.78 lifetime score
    Polis gets a 95.16
    Pingree a 97.88

    Good choices!

    We all differ in ways that matter. But we're all the same in the ways that matter most.

    by plf515 on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 11:59:44 AM PST

    •  Am I a fanboy? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      plf515

      For thinking Grayson could crush Rubio in a General Election.

      Ignore polling, were 9 months away, Florida doesn't know Rubio yet, they know Grayson, they know he fights for the middle class.

      Have you watched Rubio in interviews, he's a well dressed version of O'Keefe.

      If Florida couldn't vote in Grayson over Rubio, then the DNC and WH should write off Florida for 2012 and better pray that we win Virginia and a SouthWest state.

      Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

      by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:02:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Florida is a strange state (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        George Pirpiris, CMYK

        Northern FL is like GA or AL.  Southern FL is like nothing else in the USA.  

        We all differ in ways that matter. But we're all the same in the ways that matter most.

        by plf515 on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:09:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I would love Adam's opinion here :D (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          plf515, CMYK

          Seriously, if it is a party line state, then yes.
          If it is like Mass/NH then maybe there is a chance.

          They way I see it, Obama won Florida, John McCain didn't.

          Rubio is not hard to paint as inexperienced, inarticulate, a terrible communicator, and frankly a hard right wing nut.

          Who would do a better job at RAISING Rubio's negatives, Grayson or whoever the candidate seems to be now.

          I also think Debbie WS would make a great run against Rubio, except she has a reputation of unwillingness to kick the RW Cuban-American political machine in the teeth.  Now is her chance........................................................

          I was looking for a recent video that was played on The Young Turks where Rubio almost looked Palinesque, can't find it on youtube.

          But to close, if Dems can't win stateside against a right wing conservative, in the same state that Gore and Obama won, then the DNC needs to give up on Florida for national elections.

          Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

          by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:46:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Done, thanks for parcelling them up n/t (2+ / 0-)
  •  I wish I could donate now, but not this month (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Floande, CMYK

    I looked at my past contributions this past year and I went WAY over budget on political expenditures for 2009.
    (I finally paid for lifetime membership on this site yesterday too :P, felt it was way overdue)

    Please anyone donating, raise your donation 10$ for me.
    I am a regular donor to the PCCC and PCCC/ActBlue candidates.

    I will double down in the next push I promise.

    As we all should, aside from HCR, Bank Regulation etc, the Citizens United SCOTUS decision will put congressmen like Grayson in an unwinnable fundraising race regardless if he runs for House or Senate.
    He has REALLY good folks working for him, and I know they will make every cent count.

    Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

    by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 12:14:57 PM PST

    •  thanks, George (3+ / 0-)

      If you can't donate now, totally understandable.

      You are a great member of the progressive movement. And thanks so much for your constant support -- financial, but more-important moral -- for the PCCC's work. Much appreciated.

      •  No need to thank me, this is what I do :D (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Charles Chamberlain

        Just promise me one thing, PLEASE keep campaign strategy reform a key part of the PCCC agenda for 2010.

        We both are watching the disaster that is the black hole we call the DNC.  I am waiting with baited breath but have not gotten a clear strategy, message or agenda from them on how as a national party we will get voters to vote the party line and keep/increase our majorities.

        Maybe the geniuses at DNC and DCCC don't think election cycle has begun yet.
        Although, Obama seems to with his strong pivot and townhalls.

        Maybe Obama needs to be DNC Chair as well as POTUS :D

        Justice Roberts, America is not for sale.

        by George Pirpiris on Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 01:42:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Woolsey and Grijlava push for PO in recon fix! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBL55

     title=

    •  I heart Chellie Pingree (0+ / 0-)

      Must have called her office half a dozen times to thank her for her strong and consistent HCR/PO stand.

      "The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another." ~ George Bancroft (1800-1891)

      by JBL55 on Thu Feb 04, 2010 at 07:37:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

jcbhan, Malacandra, N in Seattle, JekyllnHyde, buffalo soldier, rick, Bill in Portland Maine, Savage, Todd Beeton, mini mum, SaveDemocracy, Bruce HB Lee, saraswati, am, mattman, sacrelicious, Shockwave, shayera, eeff, janefordean, KevinBondelli, RFK Lives, Charles in AL, 88kathy, conchita, TracieLynn, Helena Handbag, cyberKosFan, BlackSheep1, MD patriot, Loquatrix, jonah in nyc, boadicea, roses, sngmama, Spud1, Menocchio, Cedwyn, orapaho, jdmorg, dejavu, Alizaryn, Subversive, mrkvica, alivingston, Timbuk3, Pohjola, blonde moment, DarkSyde, cornflakegirl, rapala, mediaprisoner, UFOH1, PBen, Jim Dean, ccasas, blindcynic, Brooke In Seattle, Laurence Lewis, ratzo, boofdah, flubber, LNK, washingtonsmith, sueNaustin, AnotherMassachusettsLiberal, Arctor, coolbreeze, Eileen B, Ekaterin, Snud, soyinkafan, begone, mission419, BlueInARedState, mSnook, buhdydharma, earwulf, greenearth, Joshua Lyman, triv33, birdbrain64, MJ via Chicago, global citizen, gooderservice, plf515, doinaheckuvanutjob, Charles Chamberlain, Helpless, suspiciousmind, WarrenS, RantNRaven, crystal eyes, pkbarbiedoll, louavul, Quicklund, tegrat, Chief9toe, Duke S, leema, gtghawaii, VA02 femocrat, yoduuuh do or do not, yowsta, Jimdotz, Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle, bnasley, malharden, Canyon Lefty, On Puget Sound, rainmanjr, akdude6016, JML9999, TheDeminator, Counselor730, LynneK, TomP, gizmo59, VA Breeze, sand805, MKinTN, fayeforcure, ShadowSD, NotGeorgeWill, ajr111240, lineatus, Mr Rick, boatjones, FranklinJams, saildude, mofembot, noddem, bakenjuddy, Jacques, wyldraven, Stephanie Taylor, allie123, Zikar, dmhlt 66, CIndyCasella, JBL55, maggiejean, cameoanne, 1BQ, gooners, COFO1964, cybrestrike, Jessivoter, fille americaine, hannahlk, greengemini, Scott Wooledge, bbond, empireofdirt, RustyCannon, mudgod, tweedy54, notrouble, Partisan Progressive, sweeper, Zotz, velvet blasphemy, earicicle, karin27, aaronsw, Daily Activist, babajimbob, just some lurker guy, marzook, ThinkerT, asym, aj2k, Green Karma, maxzj05, math4barack, Leftcandid, George Pirpiris, Amber6541, mudmanor, marabout40, winkster, Interceptor7, fidellio, polar bear, Funkygal, alethea, Floande, alamacTHC, cany, no way lack of brain, Medina Mahmoud, salientwhisper, Quite Contrary, mateohussein, Reston history guy, Cintimcmomma, coachjdc, writerkirk, Situational Lefty, Lady Di, thomask, JohnInOregon, Pash, tardis10, Dixie Liberal, marianevans, Gay In Maine, andrewtna, dibsa, CMYK, mfprtoo, KingofSpades, Zagzula, Besdeekian, Cyndiannp, jacey, James Robinson, Ralpharama, HarryWaisbren, JBossch, NancyWilling, Natasha Patel, NWIA Granny, cilice

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site