Page 23 of 86 FirstFirst ... 13 21 22 23 24 25 33 73 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 690 of 2566

Thread: 11/3/2020 - President, Senate, House, LOCAL

  1. #661
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sweeterthan View Post
    This too. The two party system has been fucking us over for decades. We can’t get anything real done. Healthcare and the environment are prime examples.
    Candidates talk about plans for health “insurance” when the TRULY RADICAL plan is that THE COST OF ALL HEALTH CARE - e.g. all PROVIDERS, AND THIS INCLUDES PHARMACEUTICAL - SHOULD BE REGULATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!

    They regulate our cable bill, our gas bill, our electric bill, all kinds of other stuff ... WHY THE FUCK AREN’T THEY REGULATING THE COST OF SOMETHING THAT SAVES OUR LIVES?

    ALL of this should be NOT-FOR-PROFIT, AND PRICE-REGULATED.

    All this BIG BUSINESS is controlling if we LIVE OR DIE.

    And a HUGE NUMBER of Congress - both the Democrats and Republicans - are totally on board with that, in the interest of free market capitalism and their own stocks.

    Sanders’ “Medicare for All” would tax me 4% of our income, which is WAY higher than what I pay now. And we pay a LOT, now. It doesn’t address the COST of healthcare. And it will NEVER pass in Congress, because the Big Business Oligarchy won’t let it pass. Any new legislation would have to demand that these medical monopolies either be broken up or be Federally regulated, to HEAVILY bring down the costs so that we wouldn't NEED to pay such a high cost.

    EPA, yes, that is THE NUMBER ONE REASON TO GET RID OF TRUMP.

    These Big Business pricks think that pollution and carcinogens and losing fish and wildlife are worth the risks vs. profits (and they lie about “jobs” in a gig economy). They’re evil.
    Last edited by allegro; 08-03-2019 at 01:53 PM.

  2. #662
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    You know, this healthcare thing in the U.S., I don't think Americans understand how BAD this medical monopoly thing has become.

    In pretty much all urban settings, these hospital and doctor groups have bought out a HUGE number of independent doctors and pharmacies and are crowding out independents, where it's REALLY hard for independents to continue to practice or do business, and the hospitals are charging a LOT more money for services that used to be a lot cheaper, as do these physician groups.

    All of this consolidation has cost consumers a TON of money, which in turn has increased the cost of insurance.

    Add to that something that should be ILLEGAL: THE MERGERS AND/OR AGREEMENTS BETWEEN INSURANCE GROUPS AND MEDICAL GROUPS!

    Here in Chicago, we have groups of monopolies depending on geography. For example, Northshore University Healthsystem, AMITA Health Medical Group, Edward-Elmhurst Health, Rush, Northwestern Medicine, Advocate Health Care, etc.

    Within these groups are physician-own medical groups that work under the umbrella of the hospital-owned medical group. Each of the doctors working for the hospital group conforms to the profit-margin matrix and collects a salary from the hospital. The physical-owned medical groups have offices that have their own medical equipment that profits from those services.

    See these articles:

    https://khn.org/news/how-below-the-r...re-monopolies/

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#5c394ea52ce8

    Here is an OpEd from the WSJ, which I'll quote here because it'll probably end up behind a paywall:

    The ObamaCare Effect: Hospital Monopolies
    Last year saw 95 hospital mergers and acquisitions, a frenzy encouraged by the Affordable Care Act.

    By Marty Makary
    April 19, 2015

    During the 2008 financial crisis, “too big to fail” became a familiar phrase in the U.S. financial system. Now the U.S. health-care system is heading down the same path with a record number of hospital mergers and acquisitions—95 last year—some creating regional monopolies that, as in all monopolies, will likely result in higher prices from decreased competition.

    Hospital consolidation, done properly in a competitive marketplace, can have positive effects. Multi-hospital conglomerates can quickly disseminate best practices and quality initiatives, for example. But competition and the choices it provides can also disappear.

    Health-care conglomeration aligns with the Affordable Care Act, which created incentives for physicians and hospitals to work together in “accountable care organizations.” But an important and often forgotten prerequisite for this model is hospital competition.

    Some see the dangers. In a rare move, Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Janet Sanders recently blocked Partners HealthCare—Harvard’s affiliated 10-hospital conglomerate and Massachusetts’ largest private employer—from acquiring three competitor hospitals. Judge Sanders argued that the expansion “would cement Partners’ already strong position in the health-care market and give it the ability, because of this market muscle, to exact higher prices.” This threat is even greater in rural areas where one hospital is often the only provider.

    Today’s frenzy of hospital mergers and physician practice acquisitions is giving hospital systems even greater leverage to inflate opaque “charge-master” medical bills that even hospitals are sometimes unable to itemize sensibly. With no mechanism to allow free-market forces to keep prices in check, this translates into higher health-insurance deductibles and copays for insured Americans, and in the case of Medicare and Medicaid, higher taxes.

    When you’re the only game in town, you call the shots. That is one reason California Attorney General Kamala Harris is insisting on “strong conditions” before approving Prime Healthcare Services’ $843 million takeover of the six-hospital Daughters of Charity Health System. Prime is a hospital management company operating 34 acute-care hospitals in 10 states.

    Ms. Harris required Prime to continue operating four Daughters’ facilities as acute-care hospitals with emergency services over the next 10 years. She also required that all six hospitals remain in the state’s Medi-Cal program, maintain charity care benefits at their historical levels, and continue providing essential health services such as reproductive health care.

    Those conditions only begin to address the concerns surrounding such a merger. A San Bernardino, Calif., court recently held a Prime hospital, Chino Valley Medical Center, in contempt for needlessly admitting patients through the emergency room. On a national level, physician groups bought by large hospital systems are often prodded to send patients for ambulatory surgery and diagnostic procedures to the departments of their parent hospital, which may charge more than other outpatient centers the doctor might prefer.

    A study of more than 150 hospital-owned and physician-owned organizations published last October in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that patient costs are 19.8% higher for physician groups in multi-hospital systems compared with physician-owned organizations.

    The Affordable Care Act did not repeal antitrust laws. The Federal Trade Commission prevailed in three litigated hospital mergers in the last three years, and in 2014 it won its first-ever litigated case challenging a health-system acquisition of a physician group. But these victories are few. The great majority of mergers occur with little if any public debate about how they will effect prices or patients.

    U.S. Oncology, for example, boasts more than 1,000 oncologists in its network and serves nearly 20% of all U.S. cancer patients. In 2010 it was acquired by McKesson Corp., one of the largest U.S. drug distributors, in what some called a savvy move to get cancer doctors and the drugs they prescribe under the same roof. Specialty hospitals are also sprouting around the country, even franchising, exemplified by the rapid spread of the MD Anderson Cancer Center, which aims to have a center within three hours of every American. But is it wise to have one corporation in charge of cancer care for an entire state or region?

    Advocates say such expansion brings standardized care and clinical trials to more of the population, but it also results in an undeniable homogenization that may limit options for patients. If management decides that its doctors can only use one chemo drug for a particular cancer, or if the central leadership elects to not adopt a new surgical technology system-wide, will patients be told about the other options?

    As a busy surgeon, I have serious concerns about the race to consolidate America’s hospitals because of the risk that very large organizations may govern without valuing the wisdom of their front-line employees. Already many doctors are frustrated by the electronic medical records, strategic planning and hospital processes that they feel have marginalized their medical insights into their own patients.

    We can encourage the good work of hospitals to create networks of coordinated care, while at the same time insist that hospitals compete on price and quality outcomes. Achieving this balance in the wake of the Affordable Care Act is critical to ensure that one-fifth of the U.S. economy functions in a competitive and competent market.

    [Dr. Makary is a surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital and professor of health policy at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He is the author of “Unaccountable: What Hospitals Won’t Tell You and How Transparency Can Revolutionize Health Care“ (Bloomsbury Press, 2013).]

  3. #663
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    My father, who is an excellent doctor and an was an excellent surgeon before stepping away from that (malpractice insurance at the time was up to $100,000 a YEAR), was bullied, harassed, attempted blackmailed (my mother was a nurse and was forced to give up her nursing license and accept black marks on her record to this day for shit that wasn't true), and the list goes on when he chose to stay independent rather than join the corporate health conglomerate that had just moved in at the time (University Hospitals here in Ohio, if anyone wonders). He fought long and hard to keep from being shoved out of business and the only reason he was able to hold out was because he is so good. That's not my ego talking here, that's based on the years and years and years of doctors and other professionals who come to him for consults, second opinions, etc. He's one of the best, and not because he's my dad, but because the way the medical community in this state constantly calls on him for everything, it speaks for itself. They need him and they know it. Yet, even now, as a contract employ to the health system (because that's the only way he can maintain freedom while still helping patients in the area), he sometimes won't get paid for weeks or months after many other people who are fully employed by the system. For-profit healthcare is an absolute fucking nightmare and it dominated my family's finances for most of my life up until i moved out on my own. Until one of these candidates can address THAT (or rather get Congress to sit down and fucking DO IT), both parties can full on fuck themselves.

    /rant
    Last edited by Demogorgon; 08-03-2019 at 02:08 PM.

  4. #664
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,446
    Mentioned
    420 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Demogorgon View Post
    For-profit healthcare is an absolute fucking nightmare and it dominated my family's finances for most of my life up until i moved out on my own. Until one of these candidates can address THAT (or rather get Congress to sit down and fucking DO IT), both parties can full on fuck themselves.
    You could place equal blame on both parties for failing to address this... or you could notice that one of them has been fighting against reforming the profit healthcare system pretty blatantly. One of Trump's campaign greatest hits was to promise to destroy Obamacare, which was really only a good start at getting the ball rolling due entirely to Republican pushback against the concept.

    So...

  5. #665
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    You could place equal blame on both parties for failing to address this... or you could notice that one of them has been fighting against reforming the profit healthcare system pretty blatantly. One of Trump's campaign greatest hits was to promise to destroy Obamacare, which was really only a good start at getting the ball rolling due entirely to Republican pushback against the concept.

    So...
    Or, YOU could stop drinking the "anybody but Trump" kool-aid and notice that BOTH SIDES ARE BAD. One side being less bad than the other does not cancel out the fact that BOTH SIDES ARE BAD. Cat Mom just spent several paragraphs and pages pointing out how both parties are beholden to corporate healthcare kickbacks and your response is another canned "anybody but Trump"? Dude, I don't know why you try so hard to convince me to hate him. Once again, i didn't vote for Trump. In fact, I have never voted for a Republican, whether you choose to believe that or not. THEY. ALL. SUCK. And something needs done. I wish I knew what that was, and if it would even matter if I did.

  6. #666
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,446
    Mentioned
    420 Post(s)
    Both sides are bad, one's way worse. I'm not drinking the fucking Kool aid. I'm not trying to convince anyone to hate Trump. If they don't already, I'm not going to change their minds.

  7. #667
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    6,822
    Mentioned
    475 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat Mom View Post
    Good question. I was a card-carrying Democrat for 25 years until I saw corporate corruption in all party politics. We live in an oligarchy, and until we stop THAT, then all this promise of “change” is lip service. The change we REALLY need is a TOTAL REBOOT in Congress, getting rid of these corporate lifers IN BOTH PARTIES who only care about their stock holdings, etc. Because Big Business is what’s REALLY running this country, NOT “we the people.”
    ...
    i was going to say pretty much the same thing wrt corporate oligarchy.
    And I don't see this particular sort of madness ending in our lifetime. Hell, we were talking about this, here, in 2014 or 2015.

    As far as the racism and misogyny and such, I think that trump has emboldened a particular breed of asshole, and brought the dark underbelly of this country into the mainstream. And I don't think you can put the toothpaste back in the tube, when it comes to that sort of thing, AND,I feel like this has, in turn, created some extreme ULTRA liberals. Hence, socially, we're more divided than we've been since the Civil War. This will only continue to worsen, with increasingly slanted reporting, and people getting "news" and "facts" from memes. we're at the beginning of, like, a "civil cold war."
    I'm not kidding when I say that Captain Asshole's 4 years is a harbinger of the end of this country- or, at least, this country as we know it.

    that being said, I think that four more years of tump...well, I agree with @Jinsai , unfortunately. im afraid that the first term will seem quaint, and, comparatively, like a pleasant dream. It wouldn't surprise me, AT ALL, if he fucked around and started WW3. The "immigration crisis" would likely look more and more like a holocaust type situation. And he'd shoot for a third term.
    While I DO think the U.S. is fucked,ultimately, trump or not, there IS a chance of slowing it down, drastically, by electing a chief executive who isn't a narcissistic demagogue with despotic tendencies and dictatorial aspirations. and, perhaps, restoring the dignity of the office.

  8. #668
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Demogorgon View Post
    Until one of these candidates can address THAT (or rather get Congress to sit down and fucking DO IT), both parties can full on fuck themselves.

    /rant
    Good rant!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    or you could notice that one of them has been fighting against reforming the profit healthcare system pretty blatantly. .
    Dude, BOTH parties have done this. The ACA was written by insurance lobbyists.

    The ACA actually ended up HELPING monopoly healthcare providers.

    NEITHER party has addressed the profit-generation goal of big-box hospital and physician group monopolies, because they don’t want that regulation.

    Obamacare had a few good fixes but it’s been a DISASTER at regulating healthcare prices, monopolies, Big Pharma, and healthcare monopolies.
    Last edited by allegro; 08-03-2019 at 06:29 PM.

  9. #669
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Monterey Bay, Ca
    Posts
    2,605
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    The "both sides are bad" argument is a dumb fuck false equivalency. It's complete insane to try to normalize this political climate as part of a larger trend. It is exceptional. There are lots of reasons it's exceptional.

    Above all else the "both sides are bad argument" is fucking lazy, it's the kind of argument used by people unwilling or unable to put I the effort to understand finer details, nuance and pragmatism. In this case, today, it's not even finer details. If you look at what's being done to immrants right now and your response is to equate responsibility to both parties, then you are a sucker.

  10. #670
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Wretchedest View Post
    The "both sides are bad" argument is a dumb fuck false equivalency. It's complete insane to try to normalize this political climate as part of a larger trend. It is exceptional. There are lots of reasons it's exceptional.

    Above all else the "both sides are bad argument" is fucking lazy, it's the kind of argument used by people unwilling or unable to put I the effort to understand finer details, nuance and pragmatism. In this case, today, it's not even finer details. If you look at what's being done to immrants right now and your response is to equate responsibility to both parties, then you are a sucker.
    It’s not a “both sides are equally bad” argument.

    Obviously, Republicans are WAY FUCKING WORSE. That’s an absolute. For TONS of reasons.

    But both sides support the oligarchy.

    The newcomers in the House are totally “radical” thinkers in that they ARE NOT supportive of the oligarchy.

    See this: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/201...ey-healthcare/

    Anybody who doesn't see that a TON of Democrats are just as guilty of corruption and crony capitalism are lazy and want spoon-fed party politics without doing the homework.

    Bernie Sanders? He's not a Democrat. He's an Independent who is a Democratic Socialist.

    Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib are the first two female members of the Democratic Socialists of America.

    The Electoral College forces us into a two-party system that only exists to support the oligarchy.
    Last edited by allegro; 08-03-2019 at 09:34 PM.

  11. #671
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Wretchedest View Post
    The "both sides are bad" argument is a dumb fuck false equivalency. It's complete insane to try to normalize this political climate as part of a larger trend. It is exceptional. There are lots of reasons it's exceptional.

    Above all else the "both sides are bad argument" is fucking lazy, it's the kind of argument used by people unwilling or unable to put I the effort to understand finer details, nuance and pragmatism. In this case, today, it's not even finer details. If you look at what's being done to immrants right now and your response is to equate responsibility to both parties, then you are a sucker.
    They ARE both bad. I wasn't arguing about which was WORSE, because unless one side STOPS BEING BAD, then it won't MATTER who is worse because THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A WORSE. Stop being dense. Using "Oh but so and so is much worse" doesn't address the actual problem, it just punts it to the side until the NEXT worse thing comes along.
    Last edited by Demogorgon; 08-03-2019 at 08:21 PM.

  12. #672
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    I still believe that the "left" vs. "right" and "liberal vs. conservative" argument is the real (valid) argument, not the party argument.

    To me, a political party has become like an organized religion. Its primary goal is to sustain itself. It's all about the Benjamins.
    Last edited by allegro; 08-03-2019 at 09:06 PM.

  13. #673
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,446
    Mentioned
    420 Post(s)
    If you think Warren or Sanders are basically just as bad as Trump when it comes to reforming health care...

  14. #674
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    If you think Warren or Sanders are basically just as bad as Trump when it comes to reforming health care...
    We're talking about parties, not individuals, and when it comes to parties, neither one of those candidates will be able to enact positive change at all while the parties are beholden to corporate healthcare interests. Once again, Cat Mom spelled this out for you very clearly, so please try and focus on the what is ACTUALLY BEING SAID.

  15. #675
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    If you think Warren or Sanders are basically just as bad as Trump when it comes to reforming health care...
    They’re all ignoring the elephant in the room, yes.

    Here is the elephant.

  16. #676
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Laughingstock of the World (America)
    Posts
    4,579
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat Mom View Post
    It’s not a “both sides are equally bad” argument.

    Obviously, Republicans are WAY FUCKING WORSE. That’s an absolute. For TONS of reasons.

    But both sides support the oligarchy.

    The newcomers in the House are totally “radical” thinkers in that they ARE NOT supportive of the oligarchy.

    See this: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/201...ey-healthcare/

    Anybody who doesn't see that a TON of Democrats are just as guilty of corruption and crony capitalism are lazy and want spoon-fed party politics without doing the homework.

    Bernie Sanders? He's not a Democrat. He's an Independent who is a Democratic Socialist.

    Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib are the first two female members of the Democratic Socialists of America.

    The Electoral College forces us into a two-party system that only exists to support the oligarchy.
    I spent a long time typing a response to the comment you're addressing, only to then realize you've already said it better than I can.

  17. #677
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    1,890
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Thinking about the choice of words is something that one has to be mindful of when someone says "both sides are bad." You can elaborate and have nuance on a forum like this where we read the words in front of us as opposed to listening to them in a public or private place, but that's why I get a little more dismissive when I see that stance because in straightforward terms, it sounds like the same thing.

    If you say that to someone in a conversation, it comes off the way it sounds - "both sides are bad." There's no nuance, there's no room for elaboration even if you explain it thoroughly; the words just sit there and exist and make it seem as if both Democrats and Republicans are just as bad as the other and that's what has likely led to ambivalence in potential voters going to the polls and picking a side.

    When I go to the voting booth each time that there is an election, I vote for the Democrat, or I vote for the Independent who caucuses with or has Democratic views, or I just don't vote for the position at all if the Democrat is scum because I'm never going to vote for a Republican. The GOP has been building itself up to this for decades now and I didn't really notice it until my stepmother attended a tea party rally in Missouri back in 2010 that had other folks in the crowd holding up racist signs about Obama and even holding up lynched effigies of Obama.

    So, when I see "both sides are bad," it drives me nuts because one side is trying to make things better while the other side is trying to line their pockets with money and accumulate as much power as they can so that they and their rich buddies can stay rich. I can't convince Republicans to do anything else other than send out concerned tweets. I can, however, pressure Democrats to change their positions and/or support someone who will replace them. Meanwhile, we all sit here on a message board waxing philosophical and trying to encourage those of us who are ambivalent to it all to do something like canvass, volunteer, call their representative, vote in more than just general elections, etc.

    Anyway.

    I'm in Cincy now which means that I'm 15 minutes away from Kentucky. Rob Portman isn't due up for reelection until 2022 so I'm looking into how I can volunteer in cities like Florence and other areas to canvass and try to ditch Mitch. I have to do something other than just this and I would encourage everyone who feels similarly to do the same.

  18. #678
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    1,306
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    It is simply not a thorough conclusion that one party is greedy, while the other one is trying to do things better. Maybe one party has more representatives who try to make legitimately good changes and not just pandering for others for their own greed, but that is already not simply black and white. People are jacking up themselves to the extremes by degrading the other side. That article was peak example of this which said "every trump voter is a racist, period", and people desperately ate it up. Since basically every major outlet (youtube, fbook, reddit, twitter, what have you) is heavily left-leaning, I mainly come across Democrat voters, and the sheer, vile, spewing hatred they (proudly) put up on a pedestal makes me scratch my head. You simply can't say those people are any better than the ones wearing red baseball caps, and it's just sad how it's soon to be 4 years they are desperately trying to validate themselves.

    Some people also take politics way too seriously and make themselves look really dumb in the process. Just on this page someone freaked out, because another user had different views on the current political climate. His/her brain could simply not comprehend that such a thing can exist. Imagine spending 4 years to collect every anti-Trump news, sharing it, spreading it, typing down how fucking dumb, racist, ugly or whatever else he is, keeping your hopes up for a resignation or impeachment, barking at Republican voters irl, alienating your non-Democratic voter acquintances, just for in 2020 a.) Trump wins again or b.) the Democrats win, and the problems (gun violence, immigrants, health-care ISIS, etc.) the USA is facing now will largely remain the same; some may get better, while others get worse. Gee, imagine if the USA had a Democratic president from 2008-2016, now you'd have free health-care and no assault rifl-- oh wait. Anyway, these people make their own lives more miserable than the actual government. Imagine being 60 someday, looking back at your life, and a quarter of it was spent on coming up with witty Republican insults, to show everyone your intellectual superiority, and how nice you are compared to those assholes.

    Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with doing politics by going to conventions, spreading your party's message, volunteering, etc. Just don't be a fucking tool, for whom hatred is more important than actually trying to make things (in their eyes, not necessarily objectively) better. Being a jackass never made anything better, except Jackass the movie.

  19. #679
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ltrandazzo View Post
    So, when I see "both sides are bad," it drives me nuts because one side is trying to make things better while the other side is trying to line their pockets with money and accumulate as much power as they can so that they and their rich buddies can stay rich. .
    “All politics is local.”

    Or, at least, most.

    In Illinois, 4 of the last 7 Governors went to prison:

    Rod Blagojevich, Democrat (Corruption)
    George Ryan, Republican (Racketeering)
    Dan Walker, Democrat (Bank Fraud and other charges)
    Otto Kerner, Democrat (Bribery)

    In addition:

    Barbara Byrd–Bennett, Democrat, Head of Chicago Public Schools, forced to resign after accepting a $20,500,000 no-bid contract from the SUPES Academy, where she was on the board. Sentenced to 4.5 years in prison.

    Chicago Alderman Ed Burke, Republican, currently facing numerous Federal corruption charges.

    Jesse Jackson, Jr., Democrat, charged with fraud, conspiracy, making false statements, mail fraud, wire fraud, criminal forfeiture. Jackson pleaded guilty to one count of wire and mail fraud in connection with his misuse of $750,000 of campaign funds. Served 40 months in prison.

    Add to that Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, Democrat, “the longest-serving leader of any state or federal legislative body in the history of the United States, having held the position for all but two years since 1983” (Wikipedia). That’s 34 years as the head of the Illinois House.

    And John Cullerton, Democrat, a member of the Illinois Senate since 1991 and the President of the Illinois Senate since 2009.

    Cullerton’s cousin is Sen. Tom Cullerton, Democrat, who was just indicted on 40 counts of embezzlement.

    We don’t call it the “Crook County” for nothing. It’s not a joke. Trump has a building here and has been using tax attorneys to pay off a Democrat Cook County Assessor to lower his property taxes.

    More about that HERE.

    It may not be in Trump’s book, “The Art of the Deal,” but as the building was underway, he gave $10,000 to the Cook County Democratic Party, chaired by none other than Joe Berrios who handles tax appeals. In 2010, Trump gave Alderman Brendan Reilly $5,000. Trump Tower is in Reilly’s ward. Trump then donated a whopping $50,000 to then mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel.

    In 2015 the Illinois Hotel PAC that Trump routinely donates to handed Alderman Burke $1,500 and Speaker Madigan $20,000.

    Regarding money in politics, particularly healthcare, here are stats.

    Top recipients in 2018.





    Here’s an interesting article:

    Congress Is Now Mostly A Millionaires’ Club

    The Center for Responsive Politics analyzed the personal financial disclosure data from 2012 of the 534 current members of Congress and found that, for the first time, more than half had an average net worth of $1 million or more: 268 to be exact, up from 257 the year earlier. The median for congressional Democrats was $1.04 million and, for Republicans, $1 million even.

    To calculate the net worth of lawmakers, the Center added together members’ significant assets, such as corporate bonds and stocks, then subtracted major liabilities such as loans, credit card debt and property mortgages.

    Here’s the breakdown: the median net worth for all House members was $896,000 (Democrats averaged $929,000 to Republicans’ $884,000) and, for Senators, $2.5 million. The median net worth for Senate Democrats was $1.7 million, down from $2.4 million in 2011; for Republicans: $2.9 million, up from $2.5 million in 2011.

    Who’s Investing In What

    The group also analyzed the members’ investments. General Electric was the most popular holding; the minimum Democratic investment was $927,777 and the smallest Republican investment was $2,130,657. The top five rounded out with Wells Fargo, Microsoft Corp., Procter & Gamble, and Apple Inc.

    The full list of 2012 personal financial disclosures from members of Congress can be found here.
    Last edited by allegro; 08-05-2019 at 12:07 AM.

  20. #680
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Monterey Bay, Ca
    Posts
    2,605
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    This whole subforum is a dumpster fire rn

  21. #681
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Laughingstock of the World (America)
    Posts
    4,579
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ltrandazzo View Post
    When I go to the voting booth each time that there is an election, I vote for the Democrat, or I vote for the Independent who caucuses with or has Democratic views, or I just don't vote for the position at all if the Democrat is scum because I'm never going to vote for a Republican. The GOP has been building itself up to this for decades now and I didn't really notice it until my stepmother attended a tea party rally in Missouri back in 2010 that had other folks in the crowd holding up racist signs about Obama and even holding up lynched effigies of Obama.
    Here's the way I see that. Let's say I'm locked in a greenhouse and forced to live there year-round. In a desert climate. Except, someone comes up and offers me three choices: turn up the sun (GOP), put some shades in so it *might* at least cool down a little bit (Democrats), or just sit and do nothing at all (voting third party). Not matter what, it's not really an awesome outcome that's gonna magically make everything better. But some outcomes aren't as awful as others.

    It *shouldn't* be that way. But it is, and I'd rather vote with what I feel has a realistic chance to actually do something versus vote for something that I know will absolutely not do anything to change the situation at all.

  22. #682
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Well and aren’t there some other viable options?

    Like getting money out of politics?

    Like the Democratic Party returning to being the party of the working class and the people, and not worrying about corporate interests in order to generate money (both for campaigns and for personal enrichment)?

    Like meaningful Federal legislation that limits all campaign funds to a Federal public pool of funds for both (all?) parties?

  23. #683
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Toledo.

    Yes, really. This tone deaf dumbass orange fuck.

    But no, guys, cool...keep doing this “both sides” stuff.

    As if any of us truly believe Democrats are saviors. A few of them are better than others on fiscal issues. As a whole, they’re much better on social/civil issues. That’s the point.

    And I’ll address an elephant—Fuck the seemingly Libertarian direction this thread is taking. Libertarians are almost as bad as the MAGA chuds. “No rules brah cuz like my freedoms and rules just get broken anyway, amirite?”

    It does no good right now.

    We did this before, remember? Sent some of the usual right leaning ETS trolls scampering out of the thread in a page long dunk fest on libertarianism. It’s a joke. It should be treated as one.

    What should we be talking about?

    Defeating Trump is number one. Let’s fuck around with the problems within the system once the Orange Diaper Baby’s gone. Talk about the candidates. I’ll endure the “bErNiE dOeSn’T hAvE tHe BlAcK vOtE” shit. “Biden is old/out of touch.” “Warren doesn’t have the votes.” It sucks too but at least it’s pertinent!

    If the left keeps eating itself, he will get another term.

    I’m not eating this other garbage. Neither should you.
    Last edited by Swykk; 08-05-2019 at 11:36 AM.

  24. #684
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat Mom View Post
    Well and aren’t there some other viable options?

    Like getting money out of politics?

    Like the Democratic Party returning to being the party of the working class and the people, and not worrying about corporate interests in order to generate money (both for campaigns and for personal enrichment)?

    Like meaningful Federal legislation that limits all campaign funds to a Federal public pool of funds for both (all?) parties?
    These are smart discussion topics (didn’t want confusion). That second one WILL BE paramount in beating Trump.

  25. #685
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    The problems within the system are directly what led to Trump, and it shows how profoundly ignorant you are to continue to pass the buck on the subject. You obviously aren't seeing the picture here, and your efforts to demonize some of us for trying to get the discussion rolling is transparent and pointless. I get it. "Trump bad, rah rah rah" but get rid of Trump and the core problem STILL REMAINS, but you won't care because "at least it's better than Trump." Ignorant.

  26. #686
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    You’re such a whiny piece of shit and I want you to know I see through you.

    All your passive aggressive bitching (inside and outside this thread) means nothing to me. I see it for what it is.

    I will keep my focus, try and get others that meaningfully contribute here to do the same, and you will not derail it.

  27. #687
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Swykk View Post
    You’re such a whiny piece of shit and I want you to know I see through you.

    All your passive aggressive bitching (inside and outside this thread) means nothing to me. I see it for what it is.

    I will keep my focus, try and get others that meaningfully contribute here to do the same, and you will not derail it.
    Oh, boo hoo. Grow up, dude. You don't see a damn thing and you don't understand a damn thing about me, you just make up all of these stupid assumptions because you don't like things that i've said. Harden the fuck up.

  28. #688
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Yeah, I’m the guy that needs to grow up but you constantly cry passive aggressive tears about the big bad people here in the Little Things That Piss You Off thread.

    I’ll tell you again-take your own advice.

    Now Trump is trying to equate gun control with immigration. Because of course he is.

    It both entices his base and pressures Democrats to give the toddler what he wants while dangling victims of gun violence he regularly helps stoke the flames of.
    Last edited by Swykk; 08-05-2019 at 12:14 PM.

  29. #689
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Swykk View Post
    self-indulging drivel followed by predictable "Trump is bad" statement
    Are you done? Cuz man, nobody bitches around here worse than you, and it's about time the thread got back on track.

  30. #690
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,373
    Mentioned
    841 Post(s)
    Guys, come on. Please.

    I do agree that we can't continue to pass the buck on the changes needed to the two-party oligarchy.

    But I believe that the newcomers to the system aren't putting up with this shit. They believe that changes can be made to the system without throwing out the entire system, and that's okay, too.

    And, believe me, there are a lot of us older people who don't want this business-as-usual shit, either, don't want oligarchy status quo propping up the top while the bottom suffers.

    Remember, most of these people in Congress act like they all hate each other but most of them are all drinking and laughing together after hours.

    I'm not saying they all have to be horrible adversaries 24/7, but I think they should all remember why they're there and who put them there.

    And they sure as fuck shouldn't be giving themselves RAISES.



    Anyway, we have a LONG way to go until Iowa.

    A lot of people on Twitter are FAR more worried about voter suppression by the GOP and Russians than about who the Democratic primary winner will be. (Is the GOP planning to STEAL the election?)

    For instance, the lawsuit in Georgia.

    See also: https://www.unhackthevote.com/
    Last edited by allegro; 08-05-2019 at 04:42 PM.

Posting Permissions