Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 3:50 AM
Fri Nov 27
2 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email | Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Email
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/22/09
I don't know if it'll make a difference or not, but you can be damn sure the people who want to take away our rights are calling their legislators, so I feel a sense of obligation to call mine.
11/21/09
1. I still hate you as a majority leader and hope you lose next year.
2. Your chamber is still a sham and a joke and a subversion of democracy. We should have a unicameral legislature.
Have a great weekend!
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
So what is it?
11/21/09
ETA: The point of the filibuster is to force the group/party in favor of the law to gather 60 votes (which is what's required for cloture) rather than 51 (which is what's required to actually pass the bill). You can't vote on the bill until debate on it is concluded, and concluding debate - cloture - requires 60 votes.
11/21/09
#tips
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
#tips
11/21/09
#tips
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
I really don't like this woman, but if she'll vote yes on health care...I guess she deserves a nod of appreciation.
11/21/09
At least Sen Landrieu is throwing us this bone. Her constituents are fairly conservative. Glad she won't be holding it up in committee.
The Blue Dogs could have held up the bill in committee in the House and not even let it come up for a vote on the floor. In a way, they helped get it done, but I'd have preferred them to vote in favor of the bill.
11/21/09
I would a hundred times rather vote for a socially liberal but fiscally conservative "Republican" before I voted for a socially conservative but fiscally liberal "Democrat." Economics we can debate-- civil rights, we can't.
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/08/09
The idea was to create a government-run system that would give everyone access to doctors and hospitals. It wasn't to make a law that people who can't afford to buy health insurance must buy health insurance.
That's like solving the homeless problem by forcing every homeless person to buy a home.
Fail. #healthcarereform
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/08/09
You can seriously give as little as $5. That's less than a burrito.
[donate.barackobama.com]
11/08/09
11/08/09
I mean, I realize that this is a much harder sell in the USA due to a much larger populations than other countries that had UHC earlier. And I realize that in the USA the concept of "socialism" was perverted by political leaders into something bad, when in fact, democratic republics and democracies currently using some socialist programs are, well, doing quite nicely. No Big Brothers. No Animal Farms. NoWin-win for all!
This is a great step in American history. Yes, everyone has had to compromise, but every country had a rough road to full UHC coverage. I think Pres. Obama has done the best he could with the opposition he is facing in this situation. It's too bad that so many Democrats, even, are unable to look at the cold, hard facts of UHC and realize how it provides timely, high quality care for all, no matter if they are CEO's or purposely jobless drifters. But it's an amazing first step, and that really can't be denied. And it is just a first step, but eventually, more great steps will come and fill in the program, or at least is what will happen if history repeats itself once again.