Have you ever seen this YouTube Channel called “LiberalViewer“?
I personally would aspire toward having a blog more to the nature of the work of LiberalViewer in days to come.
See for yourself.
Mad as Hell about Health Care!
Mad as Hell Doctors
“This Fall, the rubber gloves meet the road.”
Find the MAHD on:
(Facebook)+(Twitter)+(YouTube)
_________________________________________________
Dr. Paul Hochfeld on Ed Schultz.
Quoting from MadAsHellDoctors.com:
You CAN handle the Truth
There’s no nice way to say it. The financial cost of health care is killing our citizens, hobbling our economy, crushing small business, and threatening the solvency of our government.
In the meantime, the Health Care Industry is spending almost two million dollars a day lobbying Congress and manipulating public opinion to accept “reform” legislation that leaves a vicious, for-profit system intact. The “public option” is a trap. We need real reform that finds immediate savings, controls costs, and accomplishes the moral imperative of true Universal Access.
A Single Payer plan is the only real path to a Health Care System that is socially, ethically and fiscally responsible. And yet, our elected officials refuse to even discuss the possibility of a Single Payer plan!
If that doesn’t make you mad, we recommend checking your pulse.
The “public option” is doomed.
First: we will still have a dysfunctional health care system designed around insurance companies.
Second: it will be impossible to cover everyone without raising taxes.
The Obama administration is already saying it is acceptable to leave out 15 million people. Which 15 million? Will you be one of them? Who gets to decide?
Third: in a “post-option” environment you can bet that the health insurance industry will manipulate the rules so that the sickest, most expensive patients will gravitate toward the public plan, which will cause it to fail. When it does, the opponents of real reform will point to the “public option” and scream: “See! Single Payer won’t work!”
There is a time for compromise – this isn’t one of them.
We believe there is only one way to control costs.
________________________________________________________
This issue and it’s seriousness is severely under-reported or completely propagandized in some media outlets.
Quoting Dr. Hochfeld from a radio interview with Alan Colmes of Fox News:
“60% of doctors are in favor of government health insurance. The vast majority of primary care providers are in favor of it.”
“We are down to about 30% primary care providers in this country, we should be at about 50%. The more primary care providers you have, and the more resources you put into primary care, the better your health care outcomes and at a lower cost.”
“We are wasting 20% of our dollars on health care costs. It’s a threat to our security. We can’t afford to throw money at health care.”
“Once we get rid of the insurance companies we can have a health care system run by health care professionals.”
“The way ‘single-payer’ works is we take the money we are now spending on health care .. 60% of this 2.4 trillion dollars is already going through the government .. instead of calling it ‘insurance premiums’ it’s just called ‘health tax’. It’s not more money, it’s the same money. Because we cut out the insurance companies, we actually get more for our health care dollars.”
“I’m mad as hell about the political process.”
“I think he [Obama] learned that the industry is far more powerful than he could ever imagine and our political process is far more corrupt than he could ever have predicted.”
____________________________________
This last quote is vital for me to point out.
I find it disturbing those on the left would find it easy to throw the man we elected to change things for the better down the stairs just because the system is broken.
That’s why we elected him.
Let the man work!
This is called “incrementalism” and in my view President Obama should have just gone for the whole-nine-yards of single-payer but it’s looking like that’s not going to happen. Mostly because they are all corrupt in Congress and hyper-corrupt in the GOP so it’s just plain outside of the list of options before Obama.
Or at least that’s my take.
I support Mad as Hell Doctors and all those fighting for Universal Health Care.
My heart is with you. Let’s keep making this case until the establishment will finally listen.
Glenn Beck Revives McCarthyism
Please watch this video for an explanation of what McCarthyism is and how FOX News personality Glenn Beck is leading the charge of it’s revival in the US.
Dick Cheney Fails To Understand American Values
Former Vice-President Dick Cheney continues to obfuscate the truth and tarnish the name of all Republicans by means of standing up for cruel and unusual punishment of military detainees.
Appearing on FOX News Sunday recently, the former Vice President continued to advocate a dangerous and sick agenda by claiming pride for the torture and prisoner mistreatment that occurred under The Bush Administration.
Beyond this outrageous fact, Cheney made a statement that I see as a direct affront to very heart of American Values like he has never done before.
CHENEY: “I am.”
–
This was a true testament to how divorced Dick Cheney remains from any understanding of our national standards of justice and our mutual values as a people.
Cheney clearly declares that he cares nothing as to the pursuit of justice to those that break the law under the blanket of authority claiming to pursue justice themselves.
This country does not accept any person or body to be beyond the law, and Cheney insulted this nation by supporting the notion that supporting illegal actions under government supervision are acceptable in a free nation of laws.
April 11, 2008: President Bush Admits to Knowing of High-Level Approvals of Torture
President Bush admits he knew about his National Security Council Principals Committee’s discussion and approval of harsh interrogation methods against certain terror suspects. Earlier reports had noted that the Principals—a group of top White House officials led by then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice—had deliberately kept Bush “out of the loop” in order for him to maintain “deniability.” Bush tells a reporter: “Well, we started to connect the dots in order to protect the American people. And yes, I’m aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved.” Bush says that the news of those meetings to consider extreme interrogation methods was not “startling.” He admitted as far back as 2006 that such techniques were being used by the CIA. But only now does the news of such direct involvement by Bush’s top officials become public knowledge. The Principals approved the waterboarding of several terror suspects, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed; Bush defends the use of such extreme measures against Mohammed, saying: “We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it. And no, I didn’t have any problem at all trying to find out what Khalid Shaikh Mohammed knew.… I think it’s very important for the American people to understand who Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was. He was the person who ordered the suicide attack—I mean, the 9/11 attacks.” [ABC News, 4/11/2008] Bush’s admission is no surprise. The day before Bush makes his remarks, law professor Jonathan Turley said: “We really don’t have much of a question about the president’s role here. He’s never denied that he was fully informed of these measures. He, in fact, early on in his presidency—he seemed to brag that they were using harsh and tough methods. And I don’t think there’s any doubt that he was aware of this. The doubt is simply whether anybody cares enough to do anything about it.” [MSNBC, 4/10/2008]
Tobacco Taxes and Regulations
I only think one thing about the issue of Tobacco Taxation:
Alcohol Taxation.
I only think one thing about the issue of Tobacco Company Regulation:
Drug Company Regulation.
—–
Alcohol Taxation:
If the drug being taxed was alcohol instead of tobacco the public outcry would tear down the establishment in days, if not hours.
I’m not even against a “Sin Tax.”
I just think that smokers have become the latest minority to persecute at the benefit of the masses. That’s all.
Drug Company Regulation:
Double-blind studies on all FDA approved pharmaceuticals and removing all conflicts of interest between FDA regulators and drug companies are far more important matters for the FDA to address than clamping down on the Nicotine-Addiction Industry.
Once again I’m not directly opposed to the new federal regulations placed on the Tobacco Industry.
I only think that this wastes time and uses yet another federal agency in a futile misdirection of vital government resources.
Waterboarding is Torture
It disturbs and disgusts me that so many American conservatives refuse to address all empirical evidence regarding practices like waterboarding while supporting these failed and immoral policies enacted under the Bush Presidency in the aftermath of the attacks of 2001.
Political partisanship aside, our nation has long stood as a global role model of a free republic and a just democracy by which the policies of fledgling democracies might observe and hopefully mimic.
A country claiming moral superiority must have reflective policies as pertaining to these morals. Any country that approves of a policy such as legal waterboarding of detainees cannot hope to claim any degree of civic morality inherent to it’s soil.
Redefinitions of torture as acceptable in any form is counter-intuitive to sound American policy making, in my view. Within political debate the same attempts are contrary to the Spirit of The Constitution itself. Not to mention the practice is specifically banned by the Military Code of Conduct and the Geneva Convention.
Media-Watchdog
This is the only reason I call myself a Media-Watchdog, one of the last of the breed.
These are just some of my saved email contacts from my personal email account.
crooksandliars@gmail.com
feedback@realclearpolitics.com
mail@journalism.org
yourcomments@foxnews.com
info@ap.org
pres@kqed.org
scoop@huffingtonpost.com
tips@hotair.com
press@thedailybeast.com
Just a sample, there‘s more. (Hot Air is highly partisan, by the by.)
Just making a point. And hoping you’ll input your own thoughts to these addresses.
Whatever good public emailing your my real name and address attached has, you can bet I did it.
And will do it again.
-
Most likely, standing while typing one-handed just like this. (Someone take a picture, I look journalistic!)
-
This post is just to dispel any confusion out there in terms of who exactly the real media-watchdogs of America exactly are.
That would be me, Eric Lightborn. The Non-Profit Student Blogger. And that’s pretty much it.
Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
March 22nd 2009
Liberal Populist
A liberal, sure. First and foremost.
But I’m not running from being labeled a “populist.” Red-baiting doesn’t phase me anymore. Let those who attempt and fail at political understanding call me what they will. I am unashamed.
With the change of a single word in a historical quote from the first American Populist to run for president in 1896 you can sum up everything I have to say about the current condition of the American economy.
“You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold [credit].” - William J. Bryan
***
The cross of the middle class and the working poor should be bore no longer. The whips of old exchanged for bare hands.
This yoke of credit and credit approval has far too long strangled the workforce of America from advancing in social class. The burden by no means stops there. (Jim Cramer the economist & Jon Stewart the comedian)
The very integrity of the American worker has been bought and sold on the open market for far too long. The largest of institutions have had ultimate sway on matters pertaining to them for an age and a day too long.
The era of protectionism has taught us well. No market is isolated. No economy is independent of the strongest economy known to exist. Recent events have shown us this beyond any reasonable doubt.
But the era of ‘deceptionism’ has yet to be fully addressed, or even understood. No industry is without accountability. No private incorporation is fit to process a majority share of any highly successful venture.
I do not support a return to the Gold Standard as those like Congressman Ron Paul who I have much respect for propose. The credit system and the existence of credit lines themselves are not the source of the crown of thorns. I support instead fully nationalizing and reforming the Federal Reserve and the Federal Exchange Commission.
In the absence of abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service I propose reform into an agency that regulates the bank rating system and monitors the highest echelons of finance with previously unseen vigor and transparency in their actions.
Those who sought to lead us blindly into these days cannot be trusted. Those who hide the truth become party to a much greater misdeed. We cannot afford to stand silent any longer in the need for a truthful news media.
To those who came before us in days of Vietnam. We say to them we have seen your sorrows and known your pain. But we are not shedding blood nor issuing violence as our battering ram against authority.
We demand recognition that our tools are by the words, protests and non-violent actions. Choked of our very means of ways by the ever-expanding, all powerful monopolies across our markets. Let all who allowed this to transpire as such come only but to apologize before the public.
Let the regulators who took part in this only shamefully resign. Let the business leaders who did nothing to tell of the coming recession when many Americans, including myself and my father, were fully aware of its coming onslaught only plead for willingness to allow them near our political structure.
I say these words as member of the Progressive Movement and a registered Democratic voter in California. Let us never forget the modern progressive, or alternatively the modern liberal, was forged in the first Progressive Reform Movement of one hundred years past. And the Populist Movement stands the father of the Progressive.
While we do not resemble our forerunners we are much the same as they. There is no tolerance for absolutism in control over the means to obtain success and prosperity.
Government Corruption: What to Know to Protect Ourselves
Government corruption is the use of the power of office to obtain personal endowment for self-gain. An easy every-day example would be, a mayor of a city using money issued to be spent on roads on a new car in the mayor’s name.
Illinois Governor Blagojevich is alleged to have attempted to sell, or barter with, the appointment of the Illinois-state Senator seat and other privileges he holds in office.
The mass media often fails to illustrate that there in fact many brands of corruption and that it is significant to understand what the major categories are. Political corruption and government corruption are the most relevant in a discussion of recent and semi-recent corruption in America.
We must indeed guard against any corruption in office but the blanket definition of simply the word ‘corruption’ by itself in a serious national discussion is bereft of value to the public.
[Read ‘Truth About Lobbyists and Public-Interest Groups’ on this site for an explanation of lobby corruption.]
Political corruption stems primarily from non-ethical actions in office and the condoning of the non-ethical actions of others. The events leading to the impeachment of President Richard Nixon was an example of political corruption on a national scale.
Government corruption is far less apparent for the public sources of information to be aware of. The ability to predict and prevent against this brand of corruption is not a task that a citizen can do more than advocate against complacency on.
The responsibility to uncover the government corruption falls on the government themselves and to the credible press.
Any official who abuses their office may not in turn break a serious enough ethical code or law to be removed from office. The charges against a corrupt official might not be sufficient to prove a case for some time, and in the meanwhile the office is in jeopardy.
A corrupt official most likely would not disclose their agenda to other significant officials unless they had some prior knowledge that this person would be of negotiable ethics. This isolates the principled officials from coming into to personal conservations with corrupt officials in which they might be able to rout out corruption first-hand.
It is within some reasonable possibility that Illinois Governor Blagojevich and any possible illegal actions he has committed in while office was not unnoticed by President-elect Obama or that there was some innuendo in Illinois circles that the Governor had questionable ethics.
Barring proof of foreknowledge we cannot accuse a person, just as we must refrain in the mass media and in our minds from a summary judgment of Blagojevich.
At this time any comments on the level of awareness of any Illinois politicians in alleged government corruption is pure speculation and no significant source has come forward to offer evidence of any connection between the allegations against Blagojevich and Obama.
Were any politician to make charges of corruption against another official and failed to prove their case before the courts and the people they would certainly lose their position and credibility.
The motivation of a national figure in modern politics includes consideration of such possibilities before pursuing a crusade against corruption. It is very important to understand this before we condemn our representatives for not throwing the disreputable and dishonest representative out of office when they sat next to them for years.
The seriousness of the crime and the loss of integrity to our government is not lessened in by political corruption over government corruption. Both offenses are the nature of what cause the loss of faith in representatives among the people of our nation.
It is highly likely that Gov. Blagojevich is about to undergo similar proceedings to what happened in the Nixon-age.
We the people must guard ourselves both in holding our representatives to high standards but also in providing a court within ourselves to the hear the case of this person said to be guilty of corruption. The ideal of innocent until proven guilty is as important within our observance of politics as it is to the legal system.
This citizen source would love to interview the Illinois Governor, who has refused to address any press until trial. I would not pronounce him corrupt by default of allegation and I am generally interested in hearing his case for the people of Illinois.
Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
December 20th 2008
Truth About Lobbyists and Interest Groups
“One study of eighty-three (primarily liberal) public-interest groups found that one-third of them received half or more of all their funds from foundation grants; one-tenth received over 90 percent from such sources. In one ten year period the Ford Foundation alone contributed about $21 million to liberal public-interest groups. Many of these organizations were law firms that, other than staff members, had no members at all. The Environmental Defense Fund is supported almost entirely by grants from foundations such as the Rockefeller Family Fund. The more conservative Scaife foundations gave $1.8 million to a conservative public-interest group, the National Legal Center for the Public Interest.” [Wilson, DiIulio 2008]
The concept of using interest groups to promote the agendas and ideals of a movement is, by this source, not exclusive to the liberal movement but heavily favored by it thus far.
President-elect Barack Obama may isolate himself from major liberal movement members if the proposed audit of Washington politics takes a lasting toll on the liberal lobbies. The next four years will certainly answer just how far this coming-administration is willing to go to remove corruption in public-interest group finance and practice but four years from now there will also once again be a national referendum on the highest office. Should the effort ultimately take power from once strong lobbies for popular liberal agendas, the informed American Democratic Voter could potentially face a struggle at the polls when considering a vote for the incumbent President.
The power of an interest-group, in a classic design, should expand as the number of members and contributors expands. The ‘funded & unoccupied lobby’ described in quote above as a law firm is a critical element of what causes the real disruptions in Washington politics.
The figures and organizations that form the American lobbies and public-interest groups of today are not necessarily the root of the problem so much as the agendas of the highest funded public-interest groups overriding the highest agendas in the court of public opinion and the highest wills of the people.
If the National Legal Center for the Public Interest (a weak lobby) were to receive a large increase in both number of members and in contributions. they should rightly increase in the voice and recognition in Washington and receive foundation grants in turn.
If the Environmental Defense Fund (a strong lobby) were to lose both member and public support their voice as a lobby should rightly decrease and even though they do not receive a majority in foundation grants they should be kept from taking them if they lacked any significant support in the public domain.
This is all within a classic definition of how the public-interest groups should work. Any number of factors can increase or decrease the power of a single lobby and for this reason most of us limit our discussion on public-interest groups, or lobbies, to the number of members that are well-known or outspoken and the money behind the group.
Lobbyists are not are always motivated by ill or by good, despite the fact the lobby they work for is focused on a critical social issue or an important national matter that concerns you or perhaps for a group with which you disagree strongly.
To speak broadly, they are like salesmen of political stances a person in Washington should take. They are not invested into the case they are making in every single case but rather deliver the best argument in favor of the lobby that they can devise.
Politicians and lobbyists are very much the same, in many ways. Without means to search the hearts of others to know for sure if they really believe what they contend or if they are simply going with the popular ideology to gain your favor, we will never know for certain if they stand for the people or if they stand for their own private interests.
We can only judge their actions in office as solid statements of policy.
Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
December 2008
Eric Lightborn
