Obama's Health Care Bill Passes...

... so let the lawsuits begin! This is what several states are planning to do in order to stop parts of the health care plan from becoming a reality. The main opposition is the part of the plan which makes health insurance mandatory for all Americans to have. You will be fined if you do not carry some type of insurance under Obama's plan, which many states is not legal. Abortions will not be federally funded in this plan, which is one part of the plan that I do approve of. However, I would make exceptions in cases of rape or incest.
So, what are the Republicans going to do now that the bill has passed? Same as they always do, cry wolf.
Let us take a short trip over to DailyKos.com for a view of what the GOPers will be bringing to the table in the near future.

This isn't over. The wingnuts are just getting started.
by Hesiod Mon Mar 22, 2010
You have already seen a diary about how Veterans groups are claiming this bill screws over our veterans. The next step in the attack from wingnuts on health care reform is to push state constitutional changes to opt out of the new system that has been put into place.
This, of course, is unconstitutional and runs afoul of the commerce clause. But who knows how the corporate crony Supreme Court will rule? The concern I have is that nervous nellie state Democrats who think the federal constitution will invalidate these stupid opt-out laws will think they have a free vote against it.
This means these stupid laws may get passed by state legislatures with a lot of Democratic assistance. It is much better not to risk letting the rightwing Supreme Court have a crack at overturning health care reform. So, we need to keep up all of the pressure we can on state level Democrats to prevent these laws from passing.
Here in Michigan, a petition drive has started to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot for November. This, of course, will get all of the crazy teabagging wackos to turn out in droves for the vote, come hell of highwater.
Its clearly a device to drive up turnout among Republicans and conservatives. Turnout that wasn't guaranteed once health care reform became law. Expect this to be repeated in states across the country. This is a surefire way to create vote and donor lists and also fire up activists.
We have to keep fighting. We have to keep making sure the truth about this bill gets out there to the media. We have to make sure that Democrats in Washington and the Whgite House DON'T STOP FIGHTING FOR THIS BILL AND COUNTERING ALL THE LIES ABOUT IT. Its not enough just to pass it. You have to also defend it.
The other side is not giving up. They are going to keep fighting for as long as they can. We should not either. Fight until they are completely defeated and demoralized.

ADDENDUM. Oh. And here is the irony in all of this. The Health Insurance industry should be flooding the zone with money in all of these states to BLOCK this crazy crap from passing. Why? Because states that opt out of the system -- even if its just during a pending court challenge -- are going to cost insurance companies tons of money.
But, because this bill's major provisions don't kick in for several years, it will be hard to point to other states that do not opt out and show how well they are doing under the system to counteract the bullshit.
© Kos Media, LLC
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/3/22/849088/-This-isnt-over.-The-wingnuts-are-just-getting-started.

Republicans Have Lowest Ratings In Decade...

... and hopefully that is because the citizens of the United States have figured out that voting GOP is voting against their own best interest.
This comes from CNN's plitical blog, but, blogger being what it is, will not post the damned link!

Thirty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, with 54 percent viewing the GOP negatively.
According to the poll, 53 percent have a positive opinion of the Democratic Party, with 41 percent holding an unfavorable view. The survey indicates that favorable ratings for the Democrats have dropped 5 points since February, with the Republican number slipping 3 points.
"The Republican party may still be battling the legacy left to them by George W. Bush," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "They have also spent a lot of time in 2009 working against Democratic proposals. That hasn't left them a lot of time so far this year to present a positive, post-Bush message. Of course, there is still plenty of time for them to do so before the 2010 midterms."
Nearly seven in ten people questioned say they disapprove of how Congress is handling its job, with 29 percent saying they approve. That's a drop of 6 points in the approval since April.

Bipartisanship For Health Care?

Original:http://dailykos.com/

Health care bipartisanship lives!
by David Waldman Thu Oct 15, 2009
If one Republican vote for the Baucus health insurance "reform" bill makes it bipartisan, how many Democratic "no" votes on cloture does it take to make a filibuster of the public option bipartisan?
Maybe Glenn Thrush knows. Or maybe not. After all, he granted anonymity for this important observation:
"If there really is such a groundswell of support for the public option, perhaps senator Schumer would like to show the caucus, especially the centrist Democrats, how he can come up with the 60 votes necessary to overcome the [Republican] filibuster that he damn well knows is coming," said a senior Democrat. In a full Senate, a "Republican filibuster" requires 41 "no" votes on cloture to sustain. There are only 40 Republicans in the Senate.So if there really is such a thing as a
"Republican filibuster" of the public option, perhaps SenatorAnonymous would like to show the world, especially his fellow Democrats, how they can come up with the 41 votes necessary to sustain this "Republican" filibuster that he damn well knows is every bit as "bipartisan" as the Baucus bill is.
Says me

Rewriting The Liberal Bible

Rewriting the liberal Bible
by kos
Tue Oct 06, 2009 at 01:20:04 PM PDT
For years, the wingnuts have claimed that the Bible is the literal word of God, and that it supports conservative ideology. Problem is, the actual Bible hasn't been as hateful and bigoted as they've wished, and really, cherrypicking the right passages while ignoring other salient ones is hard work! So conservatives, rather than adjust their belief structure to better line up with the actual Bible, have decided to rewrite it and eliminate liberal "bias".
As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following ten guidelines:[2]
Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level[3]
Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[4] defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".
Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";[5] using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."
Yup, they are admitting the Bible (and by extension, true Christianity) is too liberal.
So what are some examples of said liberal "bias" in the Bible?
The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:[7]
Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
Is this a liberal corruption of the original? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals but should not appear in a conservative Bible.
See? The passage is a favorite of liberals, so it must be excised from the Bible, since liberals were running rampant when the Gospel of Luke was written in the year AD 70. I mean, Fox News didn't even exist then! The real Jesus would've called for the "Shock and Awe" bombing of Rome, not forgiveness. GOD the Bible is so liberal!
More:
Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the "social justice" movement among Christians.
For example, the conservative word "volunteer" is mentioned only once in the ESV, yet the socialistic word "comrade" is used three times, "laborer(s)" is used 13 times, "labored" 15 times, and "fellow" (as in "fellow worker") is used 55 times.
"Without justification". Maybe the justification, if you believe in Christ, was that Christ believe in social justice? But nah, that's a liberal plot.
And much like Fox News rewrites reality in order to better ratify conservative ideology, these jokes are now setting out to rewrite the Bible to better ratify their own hate and bigotry. It's nothing new for religion -- people have been reinterpreting holy texts from pretty much every religion imaginable to justify all manners of horrors. It's just funny seeing these conservatives so overtly admit that the religion they use to justify their own excesses doesn't really support them.
(Via Little Green Footballs)

Obama Scares The GOP

From http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/10/779677/-No-Wonder-the-GOP-have-gone-crazy...-This-is-a-formidable-enemy...(UPDATE)

No Wonder the GOP have gone crazy... This is a formidable enemy...(UPDATE)
by The Simple Canadian
Wed Sep 09, 2009
What have you guys done? The sun is shining through my window, I am looking at a beautiful Vancouver, British Columbia false creek waters and the boats slowly moving through, early in the morning (6am), I brush my teeth, and I say, let's check out the dailykos before heading to work... and voila, my anonymous diary that I posted last night is at the top of the rec list??? Merci tres beaucoup les gars!!!
This is really a formidable enemy (at least to them). Obama threatens to make the GOP irrelevant for many years to come. They are unable to match up with him intellectually, charismatically and politically. And unlike Kennedy, he seem to have a damn good Secret Service.
However, every time Obama speaks, Americans remember why they are a great Nation. He seems to move the entire world with him, with just one simple speech he could wipe out all the town hall demonstrations, all smear TV ads from the McCain campaign, everything, is just wiped out.
This, my friends, is for the ages. This, is what is going to pass the health care reforms:
To the GOP, this enemy, is different, and is very very scary. No wonder, they have gone crazy.
There is something that can make you better, but I can't afford it

GOP Teabaggers In Tampa...

...and they were so infantile.

http://dailykos.com/
Opponents shouted "Read the bill!" and held up signs as U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor attempted to address the crowd Thursday. There were reports of shoving and one man had his shirt ripped as a volunteer attempted to close a meeting room door. No one was arrested.
The Tampa chapter of the activist 9-12 Project says it encouraged members to show up and ask questions. The group was developed by Fox News Channel commentator Glenn Beck. The St. Petersburg Times reported the teabaggers not only said they were Beck disciples, but that the GOP had urged them to protest:Instead, hundreds of vocal critics turned out, many of them saying they had been spurred on through the Tampa 912 activist group promoted by conservative radio and television personality Glenn Beck. Others had received e-mails from the Hillsborough Republican Party that urged people to speak out against the plan and offered talking points.
So this is what the modern conservative movement has been reduced to: encouraging infantile behavior from teabaggers, practically begging them to drown out open discussion about health care reform.
What a bunch of pathetic cry-baby losers

GOP Energy Plan

I am still having software issues, so here is an article brought to you by .

Published on Thursday, June 11, 2009 by CommonDreams.org

The GOP’s 100-Reactor/Trillion-Dollar Energy Plan Goes Radioactive
by Harvey Wasserman

As the prospective price of new reactors continues to soar, and as the first "new generation" construction projects sink in French and Finish soil, Republicans are introducing a bill to Congress demanding 100 new nuclear reactors in the US within twenty years. It explicitly welcomes "alternatives" such as oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and "clean coal." Though it endorses some renewables such as solar and wind power, it calls for no cap on carbon emissions.

According to the New York Times, this is the defining GOP alternative to a Democratic energy plan headed for a House vote later this month.

But niggling questions like who will pay for these reactors, who will insure them, where will the fuel come from, where will waste go and who will protect them from terrorists are not on the agenda. Given recent certain-to-prove-optimistic estimates of approximately $10 billion per reactor, the plan envisions a trillion-plus dollar commitment to a newly nuke-centered nation.

With this proposed legislation the GOP makes atomic energy the centerpiece of its strategy to deal with climate change.

Nuclear power requires energy-intensive activities such as uranium mining, milling, fuel enrichment, plus other carbon expenditures for plant construction, waste management and more. Reactors also convert buried uranium ore into huge quantities of heat, much of which becomes hot water and steam emitted into the environment. Reactors in France and elsewhere have been forced to shut because adjacent rivers have been taken to 90 degrees Farenheit by hot water dumped from reactor cooling systems.

None of this troubled GOP hearings this week on the future of atomic energy. There were no answers to how new reactors would be insured. Since 1957 the federal treasury has been the underwriter of last resort for potential reactor disasters. Renewed in the 2005 Bush energy plan, the commitment applies to all new reactors.

So reactors licensed to operate through 2057---as would be virtually certain under the GOP plan---would extend to a full century the atomic industry's inability to cover its own risks. Neither the Obama Administration nor the GOP has presented detailed plans for dealing with such disasters, or explained how they would be paid for.

Despite the GOP's endless focus on the terror attacks of 9/11/2001, no significant structural upgrades have been made to protect the currently licensed 104 US reactors from an air attack. The new reactors will be required to demonstrate an ability to resist a jet crash, but testing that requirement remains an open issue.

The ability to fuel this new fleet of reactors remains questionable. Reprocessing used fuel into re-usable Mixed Oxide rods has proven dirty, expensive and dangerous.

The initial experience with building new reactors runs parallel. As reported in the New York Times and elsewhere, French-financed construction projects at Flamanville, France, and at Okiluoto in Finland have soared hugely over budget and behind schedule. Much of the economically catastrophic experience endured by utilities and rate payers in building the first generation of reactors in the 1960s-1990s appears to be repeating itself with even bigger deficits. The French government's front-group Areva, which is building the new plants, has sunk into serious financial and political chaos, with potentially devastating implications for this much-touted "new generation" technology.

Recent radioactive leaks in Vermont and Illinois have underscored bitter disputes over re-licensing the 104 "first generation" US reactors. Some could now operate past the 60-year mark, even though most were originally designed to operate just 30, and all have serious issues ranging from frequent leaks to structural decay, unworkable evacuation plans and much more.

Meanwhile, with the apparent cancellation of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, the industry is no closer to dealing with its radioactive waste than it was 50 years ago.

None of which seems to daunt the industry or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which has yet to turn down a proposed re-licensing. Two states---Florida and Georgia---have now passed rate hikes aimed at funding new reactor construction. And Obama's Department of Energy may soon dole out $18.5 billion in construction loan guarantees put in place by the Bush 2005 Energy Plan. The DOE has identified four prime candidates for the money.

Nonetheless, since 2007 reactor opponents have three times defeated proposals for $50 billion in loan guarantees for new reactor construction. There is no indication from Wall Street and what's left of the private banking community that without heavy government guarantees, investments in nuclear power plants are at all attractive.

But while billing itself as the party of free enterprise---especially when it comes to health care---the GOP has made itself the unabashed champion of a technology that can't raise private capital without taxpayer backing, can't get private insurance, can't manage its wastes, and shows no sign of offering a meaningful solution to the problem of carbon emissions.

What the nuclear power industry does seem to have, however, is unlimited funding to push its product in the corporate media and Congress. This latest GOP proposal for 100 new nukes may not fly in this House session.

Sadly, Democratic-sponsored legislation is not nuke-free. The situation in Congress remains fluid and unpredictable, often changing from day to day. Various aspects of bills supported by various Democrats include hidden subsidies, disguised loan guarantees, counting nuclear power as "green" in proposed renewable portfolio standards, backdoor handouts and more. Sometimes the boosts are buried in obscure corners of sub-clauses that border on the indecipherable.

But surface they do, again and again. Thus far the anti-nuclear movement has done a remarkable job of blocking the worst of them. Continuing to do that will require eternal vigilance, endless grassroots action and the steadfast belief that in the long run, our species has the will and foresight to somehow avoid radioactive self-extinction.

Harvey Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030, is at www.solartopia.org. He is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and writes regularly for www.freepress.org, where this article first appeared.