Left In Lowell

How to Be a Tone-Deaf President

22 Responses to “How to Be a Tone-Deaf President”

1. Eleanor Rigby Says:
   October 3rd, 2007 at 1:37 pm

   In listening to NPR last night it’s my understanding that there are the votes to override the veto in the Senate, but the votes to override are not there in the House.

2. Mimi Says:
   October 3rd, 2007 at 1:40 pm

   ER:

   One more reason not to send Ogonowski to Congress.

3. Dan Murphy Says:
   October 3rd, 2007 at 4:33 pm

   The converse does not necessarily mean you send Niki to congress. What about covering all children like Patrick proposes?

   Are blogs not meant to be more informative, more fundamentally democratic than the mainstream press, to address what is left out of conventional discussion?

   Even the mainstream media has the throwaway line “also in the race independent candidate Patrick Murphy.” Yet “Left in Lowell” continues to leave him out of any MA-05 discussion, restricting information on which readers may base their choice in this election. Is there a rational explanation for this?

   Visit www.sendmurphytocongress.com for more information on Patrick and his substantive candidacy.

4. waittilnextyr Says:
   October 3rd, 2007 at 5:10 pm

   It seems like Lynne may have taken a little license with Mimi’s words.

   “One more reason not to send Ogonowski to Congress.”—Mimi

   “And Mimi is absolutely correct - this is one more reason to vote for Niki Tsongas,…”—Lynne

   Whatever happened to the support given to Rep Eldridge’s plan to provide universal, single-payer coverage? It seems that Dan Murphy is correct, that his brother’s proposal does just that!

5. Josh Says:
   October 3rd, 2007 at 8:52 pm

   Lynne, you complain that conservatives paint you as anti-troops because you’re anti-war, but you have no problem painting those who are anti-socialized medicine as anti-children. A double-standard if I ever saw one.

   The president is right on this one… it’s just another step toward socialized healthcare. I’m glad he vetoed it. I wish he’d veto more spending when it came across his desk. You, on the other hand, never saw a spending bill that you didn’t love.

6. Dan Murphy Says:
   October 3rd, 2007 at 10:03 pm

   In your own words…

   by Lynne at 10:35 am.

   “First, I don’t care who you vote for, if you’re in the fifth district, just vote.
   But, beyond that, if you want someone who will stand up on principle, who unequivocally is for single-payer health care reform and will not stop until we have it…”

   “Some issues on which Jamie’s position shows his courage in leadership:
   • For single payer health care, and for restructuring our system to let go of profits, which are at complete odds with quality, affordable, universal care.
   • Restructuring our trade - Fair trade, not free trade. Free trade has been a disaster for workers, for our nation, and for the countries our corporations are allowed to exploit. But we can do global trade better.
   • Education - repealing the NCLB act, fully funding special ed which is crushing our schools, and increasing the quality of our education without the ineffective high stakes “standards testing” which has failed us.
   • Defunding the war and getting our boys and girls home safely.
   • True campaign finance reform, including publicly-funded campaigns. Jamie was the only state candidate in Mass elected on the short-lived Clean Elections law. He knows what that means - not being beholden to big money special interests but ot the people of his district.”

   Tsongas Staffers Walk Into a Place, Think They Own It
   by Lynne at 4:02 pm.

   “It seems to me that it’s that sense of entitlement (”we can walk into a place we’ve been invited into and tear down other people’s materials”) that I dislike the most about the whole Tsongas campaign. This incident may be a teeny, tiny, petty example of such, but part of a larger pattern.”

   Tsongas Supports Romney-Style Individual Health Care Mandate
   by Lynne at 11:37 am.
   ‘Ha, ha, I couldn’t have possibly guessed that Niki Tsongas would have gone the Mitt Romney route…she has clarified that she supports the individual mandate forcing Mass residents to buy private health care insurance. The individual mandate, if you recall, was Romney’s baby, placed into the MA health care reform bill “compromise” at his insistence.
   Besides the MA health care reform being corporate welfare on steroids, the forcing of residents to buy private health care and putting dough in the pockets of big HMOs for really crappy health care is one of the worst elements of the health care mess Romney left us.
   Niki and Mitt…both completely misunderstand the health care problem in this country. Both, apparently, side with big business over the welfare of individuals. Would you want Mitt Romney as your Rep in Congress? Well this position, in my eyes, puts Tsongas squarely in Romney territory.
   AnnEM puts it this way in the story’s comments:
   Re: “Niki would not support an individual mandate in the absence of an employer mandate…”
   Hello!!!! We are not idiots!!!!
   The MA “employer mandate” of $295 per worker PER YEAR is worse than a cruel joke; it is a slap in the face.
   So Ms. Tsongas thinks that the $295/YEAR employer mandate is demonstrative of fair and equal “shared responsibility” when the individual mandate is $325/MONTH for a 55 year old? Is she serious?’

   Just How is the MA Health Care Reform Not Perfect, Niki?
   by Lynne at 2:37 pm.
   I grow tired of trying to find real actual non-platitude answers from Niki Tsongas. And I’m angry.
   On health care, I’ll admit that I admire Jamie’s position, sympathize with Eileen’s, and scratch my head over Finegold’s. But no one’s health care position frustrates me more than Niki Tsongas’.
   In the Lowell Sun’s article on the MA-05 Carlisle candidates’ forum, Niki is paraphrased as stating: “Tsongas said the Massachusetts Health Care ‘Connector’ Plan, while not perfect, would be ‘a great place to start.’”
   Really, Niki? Just exactly where, with fine detail please, do you think the MA reform plan is not perfect, and where would you propose to adjust the plan to cover the gaps that imperfection would create? You are no longer allowed to talk about the Connector plan, until you actually understand the underlying issues and consequences of the plan. Oh, wait, the marketplace will take care of everything. Isn’t that your position? Then say it like a real candidate instead of using this dodging, non-answer bullshit. But…you know you can’t use that line about the marketplace because no one who struggles with their HMO on a regular basis will ever believe it…yet you offer nothing else in its stead.
   Feh. It’s like talking to a wall, anyway. She can’t come out and have a real position (market-based or otherwise) because as far as I can tell, she hasn’t once yet demonstrated a deep understanding of the current state of health care in the United States. I don’t care what board she’s on.
   Well, Niki? Are you going to actually do some homework or not? The voters, I think, deserve a true and specific answer to what you will do if elected. It’s only our health, after all.

   http://richardhowe.com/?p=353

   • Lynne said,

   on July 20th, 2007 at 10:59 am
   Sure, will, far be it for an activist to have and express an opinion at all.
   Will’s just bitter because he thinks I don’t give Niki Tsongas a fair shake.
   Did it ever occur to you, will, that I really wanted to like Tsongas as a candidate? That I gave her every shot to get her message across about her positions before I made up my mind?
   For all the reasons I’ve listed on my blog, she failed almost every test of a good leader who shares my values. On top of the compromised positions she’s taken on issues, the fact that she gets a lot of her donations outside the district and relies on big donors, she’s also running the sort of campaign I cannot respect. Who gets access to Niki? Who will get access to Niki if she’s elected? That’s the question voters need to ask.

   Tsongas Nosedives on at Least One Huge Issue
   by Lynne at 11:41 am.
   Here’s where I start to get primary-partisan. I always knew, at some point, there would be disagreements between the candidates, and some of them would be deal-breakers for me, and that I couldn’t be shy in voicing them. There are other concerns I have about Tsongas as a candidate, on issues of trade, and on substance in general. The most clear issue, however, has become very apparent. That would be her position on universal heath care.
   I attended the GLAD (Greater Lowell Area Democrats) breakfast today, where candidates Niki Tsongas, David O’Brien, Barry Finegold, and Jamie Eldridge all stopped by before their Methuen campaign stop (another…breakfast?). Tsongas and O’Brien had never attended a GLAD meeting as candidates before, so they got to take more time to speak, then answer questions.
   Although there have been indicators in the past that Tsongas is not for true single-payer universal health care, and that she has mentioned her time on the Board of (I think) Fallon, it became perfectly clear to me today that she is completely wrong, wrong, wrong on how to fix our health care system.
   One statement she made was that we underestimate the power of the market for keeping costs down. What the heck planet is she from?
   Last I checked, we had double-digit increases on a regular basis. I’ve heard of cost increases as high as 15-18% some years. There are numerous studies like this one citing that administrative overhead accounts for somewhere around 30% of private US health care versus half or less that in other industrialized countries where they have universal health care. Private companies are hiring people to deny you care, along with increasing their advertising and red tape. All along, our quality of care has diminished. I am not getting better service for my increased premiums, thanks very much. (As someone who was off of health care for 6 years because we were contract/self employed, I can tell you that the quality of care has certainly gone down since I was last insured. It’s like having a baby nephew in another state that you only see once a year - you can see how much he’s grown even if his mother doesn’t realize it.)
   What Niki Tsongas doesn’t get is that if you want to deliver health care to a population, it is an inherent conflict of interest for a private system to be the vehicle. Why? Because for a private corporation, their bottom line is more important than the right of every person to have quality health care. This is borne out by the experiences of millions of Americans, who understand they are getting less for their hard-earned money. Critics of a universal health care plan say that it will lead to rationing. It’s not rationed now? How long does it take to get a doctor’s appointment these days? This last time, I had to make an appointment about 5 months ahead. How much time did we get with the doctor, despite the need we had? We were lucky to get 20 minutes.
   That’s not to say private companies have no place in health care. I would be happy to see their role shrunk down to supplying the market with supplimental plans that richer people can add to their basic government health care if they so choose. You know why health care companies are so scared of the universal health care debate? Because if they were forced to compete even in a limited capacity with the government, whose administrative overhead percentage on Medicare/Medicaid is a tiny fraction of the private insurers, they would be shown to be the money-hogging buffoons that they are. They couldn’t compete, because the free market has not worked for bringing better quality care for less cost. Instead, we have skyrocketing premiums and nothing to show for it.
   I don’t know where Niki Tsongas gets the idea that the market has been successful at bringing down costs. But I do know even if it has gotten cost effective in any area, that has been far outstripped by increasing costs of their own making elsewhere.
   This is a deal breaker for me in this race. My husband and I, as I mentioned, were uninsured for six years. In that time, my husband’s and my health deteriorated for want of preventative care. Private companies don’t want to (affordably) insure the self-employed or the poor or the old or the sick; the more they externalize that cost the more money they make. It’s time to externalize the entire system and offer fair, quality, universal single-payer health care like every other first world democracy in the world. If you want that too, then Tsongas is not the candidate who will deliver.

7. waittilnextyr Says:
   October 4th, 2007 at 11:07 am

   I think Lynne is right on with her prior comments.

   Although competition is usually good at controlling costs, let’s look at where the current system has brought us in healthcare.

   1) High-priced adverts to promote business top-line growth.
   2) Kick-backs to promote top-line growth.
   3) Duplication of expensive technology to promote top-line growth
   And,
   4) Restriction of healthcare to promote bottom-line growth.

   Add in the profit and administration costs, and you get less service at a higher price.

   How soon we forget.

8. Shawn Says:
   October 4th, 2007 at 12:52 pm

   Be careful Dan, you’re being logical in a political world.

   The partisans are more interested in their “party” than what is “best” and who has the best proposals.

9. Mr. Lynne Says:
   October 4th, 2007 at 1:40 pm

   I don’t think Lynne has gone out of her way to disparage Mr. Murphy, but I guess he has every right to complain that he doesn’t get a fair shake. The elephant in the room is electablity and it does matter. No disrespect to Mr. Murphy but ask the Nader voters of Florida.

10. Lynne Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 2:08 pm

    No offense Dan, but I’m not an “unenrolled” voter. I’m a Democrat. I fight my battles in the primary, and to be honest, a vote for Patrick Murphy is a vote for Oganowskui for all intents and purposes. Until our voter system is fixed (ie, IRV or other non “one man, one vote” systems) that is going to be the case. I don’t like it, but that’s the game. You fight for ideology in the primary, and then you don’t be stupid, and vote to support your party in the general. This will be the case even if, say, Hillary Clinton wins the Dem nod for ‘08, and I can’t stand how compromised Clinton is. She is, however, 100% better than the Republican. Whoever that will be. I was NEVER a Nader voter, not even in 2000. Before we knew what an ass he was. Yes, party means something. Our party needs direction change, certainly, but we can’t do that if we remain forever in the minority because of our purity. I’m with Kos on that one.

    And Tsongas, for all the flaws that have been pointed out in the primary, IS a Democrat, and what’s more, isn’t a bad one - just isn’t my ideal. Well, very few are my ideal. Not only that, but I feel the primary process, and my candidate, helped to inform the debate, educate all the candidates, even Niki, who became more in line with my views as time went on, especially about free trade. I will still continue to educate her long after she’s elected.

    But if we let purity be the enemy of getting rid of Bush’s policies and keeping the Republicans from gaining the upper hand again, we’re screwed. If Patrick had wanted my support, he should have ran Democrat in the primary (his principles appear to be largely in line with the Dem platform). There’s reasons to adhere to a party and be partisan, just like there’s reasons to form a union and unify. It’s called “numbers” and without committing to a party, we don’t have ‘em. So if you want a fair shake, write it up yourself (like you just did in the other thread, which I applaud). But don’t you dare accuse me of having no principles. Because principles are nothing if the other side wins and stomps ALL over them, like the Republicans will. I DO NOT WANT Ogonowski to be my Rep. He’s wrongheaded a million times over. Patrick Murphy could make that possible, and so therefore, I will not endorse him. I like him, I like his ideas, but he has no shot in hell, though he could tip the scales just enough to ruin it for the rest of us. I’m glad he’s in the debate, I’m glad he’s running, but he’s not my candidate.

    I think it’s disingenuous for you to come here, whine that I don’t cover Murphy enough (if you look at my coverage I haven’t had much time to cover ANYthing in the 5th for a couple weeks now, actually), then attack me personally. It does your candidate absolutely no good. It makes you look like you’d rather make enemies than friends.

11. waittilnextyr Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    Well, if all the Democrats vote for Tsongas, and all the Republicans vote for Ogonowski, and all the Independents vote for Murphy, Ogonowski would come in a distant third in the race.

12. Whitney Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 2:43 pm

    And if all independents vote for Murphy then Murphy wins. The majority of registered voters in this district are not registered democrats or republicans. So go ahead and everyone vote your party.

13. Lynne Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 2:53 pm

    Give me a break. Most unenrolled tend to vote Dem or Republican depending, in MA mostly Dem but MA-05 is a weird place. Unenrolled is NOT a party. It’s not an ideal. It’s certainly not united. So no, Unenrolleds aren’t just going to vote for an independent, if they were, Murphy or others might have a shot. Non party enrollment is not what Unenrolleds are looking for in a candidate.

    No, this is about a Bush candidate, a strong Dem candidate (who IS a good Dem), and a bunch of people who could be spoilers either way. I wish it wasn’t that way but that’s how it is, and as I said, I do NOT want Ogonowski as my Rep. All idealism and no pragmatism means neither one wins in the end. Again, you fight those battles in the primary for your party (and if you ask me, the Republicans better get on that, as their party got stolen something fierce). There’s no flipping of ideals here…there’s ideals tempered with pragmatism.

14. Dan Murphy Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 3:42 pm

    Lynne,

    I’m not interested in your endorsement of Patrick. I don’t whine and I’ve said nothing disparaging. I expect only that a blog which seeks fairness in the media would see to fairness here. I don’t know how quoting you is interpreted as a personal attack. I think it doesn’t do my candidate any good if his voice and ideas aren’t heard. A vote for Patrick Murphy is just that, a vote for Patrick Murphy. In this whole thread, the only disrespectful remark made was that Patrick would “ruin it for the rest of us.” This is fear-mongering. It is a tactic used by the President. It is used by the Republican party. It is used by Democrats. And it sends a regressive message to those who would sacrifice their time to run for you, without even knowing you.

15. Dan Murphy Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 3:49 pm

    Ideals, backed by pragmatism, have fueled the ideas that Patrick shares readily on his website.

16. Lynne Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 4:15 pm

    And I’m telling you to look at my ability to write about the MA-05 race lately in general. I’ve been busy. Mimi and I write here voluntarily. We don’t get paid. You haven’t gotten any less than any other, frankly.

    And yes, it was an attack. You are essentially saying that because I backed a candidate on principle, and opposed Tsongas, in the primary, that I am unprincipled for backing the winner of that primary when my candidate loses. It’s basically what you intended by “quoting” me.

    Well, in either case, I take exception. And I am stating fact when I say your candidate could be a spoiler for getting Ogonowski in, which would be a disaster. Is that not a fact? Why shouldn’t I be allowed to point that out, on my own blog?

17. Dan Murphy Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 6:48 pm

    I don’t get paid either. I don’t know what that has to do with integrity.

    “You haven’t gotten any less than any other, frankly.” I am not running, Patrick is. In the last two posts here, including one that mentions a proposal for which Patrick was responsible, you do not mention Patrick.

    Those are your words. Take responsibility for them. There are people, I am sure, that supported Jamie Eldridge and now support Niki Tsongas, but not all of them made such polarizing remarks about Mrs. Tsongas.

    It is a fact that Mr. Ogonowski does not belong in Congress. It is not a fact that my brother is a “spoiler.” It is disrespectful to discredit him as such. He has, on the contrary, raised the level of politics in this race. Why, for example, is Mrs. Tsongas not considered the spoiler keeping Patrick out?

    This is my last comment here. I have come to realize the weaknesses of not only the mainstream media with all the money involved, but also of blogs, where (though perhaps more democratic) there does not exist any sort of meritocracy of thought. Thus, you can and will point out whatever you like, however illogical it may be.

18. Mr. Lynne Says:
    October 4th, 2007 at 8:13 pm

    Dan. Lets make this simple. What do you want from Lynne?

19. Lynne Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 12:15 pm

    Do I get get press releases or information from Patrick’s campaign? No. I have never gotten them. So now I’m responsible for digging up every stance your candidate has, and posting them? Like I said, I don’t get paid - and that wasn’t an indicator of integrity, that’s a statement that there are limited hours in a day that I can sit there and research every little thing on my own time. I do have to make a living. It’s Patrick’s job to get his message out, not mine.

    Has he sent me things to post for him? Nope. Has his brother been posting his positions here regularly? Yes. And I’ve said how great that is how many times? But this is a partisan website…I find it hard to believe you didn’t know that at the outset. As such, yeah, I’ll state facts like the fact that there’s limited (if any) chance for Patrick to win. I can lament that fact all I like but it’s fact. And it’s also fact that if enough votes are siphoned off Niki, Ogonowski will win. This is, after all, a website I created, so I’m perfectly fine with standing up for my words.

    My point was, by the way, I have had less time for MA-05 lately, and you (meaning Patrick’s campaign) have been on my radar just about as much as the race is in general now. Which isn’t a good thing, but it is what it is. There’s several other emergencies I’m attending to.

    I have constantly applauded Patrick, and you, for things you have posted here. But I am not your gatekeeper. It’s the job of the campaigns to get their own message out, and I have seen very little from yours in getting it to me, other than your comments. And, if I want to prefer the Democrat to an independent, that’s my business - and I will say so, and the reasons for such.

    Let’s face it - there is no “unenrolled” blog. But, by all means, if you think there’s an audience for one, start it. I have no monopoly on the web, and am always happy to see more voices out there. Certainly, I criticize my own party just about as much as Patrick does. But as I said, it’s not my job to be your campaign. “Connecting” to the blogs isn’t an automatic process. It takes commitment and work, just like anything else. I’m not a charity. *shrug* I don’t know quite what you were expecting, but I’m sorry you haven’t found it.

20. joe Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 1:08 pm

    Has anyone ever seen the Simpson’s episode when Bart runs for class president? This debate riminds me of that show.

    At one point, Bart’s opponent Martin is shown holding a sign that reads “A Vote for Bart is a Vote for Anarchy!” Then the camera pans over to Bart, who is holding a sign that reads “A Vote for Bart is a Vote for Anarchy!”

    Republicans keep telling us, “This is just the first step in the Democrats’ plan to implement universal health care.”

    To which Democrats reply, “This is the just the first step in our plans to implement universal health care.”

21. waittilnextyr Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 2:31 pm

    Not exactly, joe - the Republicans will use the term “socialized medicine”, as if anyone is a Communist who wants to take health care decisions away from the insurance companies.

22. joe Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 7:55 pm

    Socialized Medicine!?! Why, that’s the worse idea since the Death Tax!

    Q: How many Republicans does it take to change a light bulb?

    A: OpportunityBulbs! They’re called OpportunityBulbs!

Leave a Reply