Lieberman Obstruction Leaves Bloody Hands

The lives of 150,000 people would be saved with the Senate compromise health care bill, but Senator Joe Lieberman may be ready to go against principle to obstruct the legislation. Ego or evil? Follow this story and learn why the people often lose out to big business. People loose and big corporations win, this time at the expense of 150,000 lives over ten years. Opinion based on various news reports and featured video MSNBC with Keith Olbermann and guest Ezra Klein of The Washington Post.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Lieberman
• obstruction
• healthcare
• obstructs
• health
• care
• medicare
• buy-in
• MSNBC
• Keith
• Olbermann
• Ezra
• Klein
• Washington
• Post.
• debate
• Democratic
• Party
• Democrats
• revenge
• gossip

[mindoermatta]

Joe Lieberman is a dead man walking politically speaking. He has sunk to a new low and will be punished severely.

[Sheeple101]

they will not get any healthcare at all, so I guess in a way you are right! No care what-so-ever because they are not worth saving.

[TheMadOrc]

Sounds about right.

[biggerturtle]

This guy is a total idiot. He throws"facts" around that come out of his ass

[Zakdayak]

I discussed central p[lanning because it's one of the similarities between Fascism and Socialism. I repeat:

Obama is a moderate in practice. He's only left of center in his speeches.

[Zakdayak]

It's true that there is ambiguity as to where Fascism exists on the political spectrum. However, Fascism rejects class conflict (centerpiece of Marxism), Marxist theories (Dictatorship of the Proletariat, alienation, class conflict) and so one cannot be BOTH a Marxist and a Fascist. Socialists also rely on class conflict. Yes, Fascism is sometimes critical of capitalism, but that doesn't make them leftists.

The argument is academic anyway because Obama is a moderate in practice.

[nnjhansen]

We are not discussing central planning. We are discussing your statement that socialism is left-wing and fascism is right-wing. There is nothing right wing about fascism. It is a leftist ideology that sprang from the same socialist well as Marxism and the New Deal. This was understood at the time. Do yourself a favor, read some Mussolini, take a look at the National Socialist (NAZI) platform and tell me what was "right-wing" about it.

[Zakdayak]

I already mentioned central planning for that reason. But similarities (or even the existence of totalitarian systems on both sides) doesn't mean they're the same thing. OF COURSE Hitler tried to make an argument. A lot of what gov'ts do is designed to help people - and so they implement mixed systems. In the US we have USPS, libraries, medicare, fire and police protection for the public, emergency services. etc...that doesn't make us a Socialist country.

[nnjhansen]

That is because your knowledge of the matter is seriously lacking.

Before the start of WWII, Hitler, and Mussolini each wrote of the similarities between their approaches and that of FDR. The Brain Trust was clearly enthralled with the Italian model. A report issued by the National Recovery Administration stated, The Fascist Principles are very similar to those we have been evolving here in America.

[Zakdayak]

Sorry, this (quote) is just political commentary. I don't take a comparison of Mussolini's Italy with the United States of America under Roosevelt seriously. The Marshall plan was a big achievment of central planning for example, and central planning existed in both Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, that means there's no difference between Stalin and Secretary of State Marshall? Common.

[nnjhansen]

You may want to research FDR's National Recovery Administration. As Anne O'Hare of the NY Times put it in May, 1933; "The Roosevelt administration envisages a federation of industry, labor and government after the fashion of the corporative State as it exists in Italy.

[Zakdayak]

It certainly was not Fascists. And FDR did a lot less than some conservatives imagine. However, there were some Socialists that helped to implement his plans, and I believe most right-wingers would label the New Deal as Socialist.