Sen Warren attacked by status quo/pro wall st Democrats

[jasonnfree]

The insurance industry hates the tea party, and the plaintiffs bar.

The tea party loves anything they are told to love. And that includes the insurance companies interests as supported by their bought and paid for politicians.

Not that it matters. the tea party is quietly slipping away.

Keep deluding yourself. The tea party came into existence as a response to Obamacare. Which, of course, is government subsidized insurance companies. Crony capitalism writ large. Mussolini did the same thing.

The tea party was dreamed up in a koch funded right wing think tank. Do you think poor irate americans funded those big new buses and organized and funded the tea party movement? They're now backing tea bag crazies in republican gerrymandered congressional districts that have even conservative republican politicians worried.

 

[percysunshine]

The tea party loves anything they are told to love. And that includes the insurance companies interests as supported by their bought and paid for politicians.

Not that it matters. the tea party is quietly slipping away.

Keep deluding yourself. The tea party came into existence as a response to Obamacare. Which, of course, is government subsidized insurance companies. Crony capitalism writ large. Mussolini did the same thing.

The tea party was dreamed up in a koch funded right wing think tank. Do you think poor irate americans funded those big new buses and organized and funded the tea party movement? They're now backing tea bag crazies in republican gerrymandered congressional districts that have even conservative republican politicians worried.

And you learned about this conspiracy theory in which séance room? Be honest. They probably need the business.

 

[Stephanie]

Funny, I would have titled this thread something like "Asshole politician attempts to infringe on rights of little people." I guess that is an indication of the difference between a liberal and a progressive, one sides with individuals, the other sides with the asshole politicians.

bingo and right on
just like they did with the Irs

 

[georgephillip]

The problem in the US isn't wage or income inequality. It's wealth inequality.

"In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2010, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 53.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 89%, leaving only 11% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers)."

What I find confusing about the information in this link is how little wealth concentration appears to have changed over the last quarter-century. In 1983 the richest 1% owned 33.8% of all wealth and in 2010 the (same?) 1% owned 35.4%. To someone ignorant of economic intricacies, it seems like the US wealth gap hasn't changed appreciably in the last 27 years?

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

 

[Dot Com]

Fox/WSJ panel on the sidelines salivating:

After they finished bashing Pope Francis for daring to speak up about income disparity and the need to take care of the poor, talking heads on Fox moved on attacking yet another of their favorite targets, Massachusetts Senator and progressive champion Elizabeth Warren.

The Journal Editorial Report viewers this Saturday were treated to what basically amounts to round two of this nonsense: The Wall Street Journal’s pathetic attack on Elizabeth Warren:

- See more at: http://crooksandliars.com/2013/12/w...vr.it&utm_medium=twitter#sthash.BW8Reoiy.dpuf

 

[georgephillip]

Fox/WSJ panel on the sidelines salivating:

After they finished bashing Pope Francis for daring to speak up about income disparity and the need to take care of the poor, talking heads on Fox moved on attacking yet another of their favorite targets, Massachusetts Senator and progressive champion Elizabeth Warren.

The Journal Editorial Report viewers this Saturday were treated to what basically amounts to round two of this nonsense: The Wall Street Journal’s pathetic attack on Elizabeth Warren:

- See more at: WSJ Panel Celebrates 'Third Way' Attack on Elizabeth Warren | Crooks and Liars

Neither Fox nor the WSJ have the slightest doubt about who rules in the US:

"Who has predominant power in the United States?

"The short answer, from 1776 to the present, is: Those who have the money -- or more specifically, who own income-producing land and businesses -- have the power.

"George Washington was one of the biggest landowners of his day; presidents in the late 19th century were close to the railroad interests; for the Bush family, it was oil and other natural resources, agribusiness, and finance.

"In this day and age, this means that banks, corporations, agribusinesses, and big real estate developers, working separately on most policy issues, but in combination on important general issues -- such as taxes, opposition to labor unions, and trade agreements with other countries -- set the rules within which policy battles are waged."

Who Rules America: The Class-Domination Theory of Power

The site I just quoted operates on a Four Networks theory of power which alleges that large economic networks rule in the US because, unlike Europe, there were no rival power networks that materialized over hundreds of years.

 

[f252863]

Warren is another corrupt politician who is in the back pocket of lobbyists and special interests.

Apparently the diary producers bought her off, they get free subsidies thanks to an act she voted for:

"What is the Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program (DPMPP)?

The DPMPP is an insurance program which provides a floor for producer margins. It will help offset low margins caused either by low milk prices or high input costs, and prevent an erosion of equity. It provides producers who sign up for the program with a basic level of protection (a $4.00 minimum margin) at no cost, along with the option to purchase supplemental coverage insuring up to an additional $4.00 margin."

This is America? A land where what you earn is determined by political favoritism?

 

[georgephillip]

Warren is another corrupt politician who is in the back pocket of lobbyists and special interests.

Apparently the diary producers bought her off, they get free subsidies thanks to an act she voted for:

"What is the Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program (DPMPP)?

The DPMPP is an insurance program which provides a floor for producer margins. It will help offset low margins caused either by low milk prices or high input costs, and prevent an erosion of equity. It provides producers who sign up for the program with a basic level of protection (a $4.00 minimum margin) at no cost, along with the option to purchase supplemental coverage insuring up to an additional $4.00 margin."

This is America? A land where what you earn is determined by political favoritism?

My quick Google didn't reveal any specific mention of your allegation; however, there seems to be a New England-wide problem with dairies. Perhaps Warren's support for dairy producers was part of a regional response to a real problem?

"Dairy farmers in New England are in crisis. We have lost 890 dairy farms (33%) in New England
over ten years. The federal milk marketing order system fails to take into account our regional costs of
production. The one minimal safety net available, the Milk Income Loss Contract program, expired
with the 2008 farm bill. Dairy farmers are New England’s 'anchor tenants' and maintain our landscape
and keep farm service providers and retailers in business. What policies do you support to ensure a solid
dairy industry in Massachusetts and New England?"

http://www.newenglandfarmersunion.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Elizabeth-Warren-Campaign-Responses-.pdf

 

[f252863]

Warren is another corrupt politician who is in the back pocket of lobbyists and special interests.

Apparently the diary producers bought her off, they get free subsidies thanks to an act she voted for:

"What is the Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program (DPMPP)?

The DPMPP is an insurance program which provides a floor for producer margins. It will help offset low margins caused either by low milk prices or high input costs, and prevent an erosion of equity. It provides producers who sign up for the program with a basic level of protection (a $4.00 minimum margin) at no cost, along with the option to purchase supplemental coverage insuring up to an additional $4.00 margin."

This is America? A land where what you earn is determined by political favoritism?

My quick Google didn't reveal any specific mention of your allegation; however, there seems to be a New England-wide problem with dairies. Perhaps Warren's support for dairy producers was part of a regional response to a real problem?

"Dairy farmers in New England are in crisis. We have lost 890 dairy farms (33%) in New England
over ten years. The federal milk marketing order system fails to take into account our regional costs of
production. The one minimal safety net available, the Milk Income Loss Contract program, expired
with the 2008 farm bill. Dairy farmers are New England’s 'anchor tenants' and maintain our landscape
and keep farm service providers and retailers in business. What policies do you support to ensure a solid
dairy industry in Massachusetts and New England?"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S 954 - Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013 - Key Vote

I don't support any policies that back subsidies from the public to the private sector.

Suppose you and I are manufacturers of the same product and we are competing for market share.

I hire a lobbyist and get legislation passed that gives me an economic advantage over you. The senator who originates the bill says it is for the common good. In 3 years I put you out of business, do you have any objections?

 

[georgephillip]

Warren is another corrupt politician who is in the back pocket of lobbyists and special interests.

Apparently the diary producers bought her off, they get free subsidies thanks to an act she voted for:

"What is the Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program (DPMPP)?

The DPMPP is an insurance program which provides a floor for producer margins. It will help offset low margins caused either by low milk prices or high input costs, and prevent an erosion of equity. It provides producers who sign up for the program with a basic level of protection (a $4.00 minimum margin) at no cost, along with the option to purchase supplemental coverage insuring up to an additional $4.00 margin."

This is America? A land where what you earn is determined by political favoritism?

My quick Google didn't reveal any specific mention of your allegation; however, there seems to be a New England-wide problem with dairies. Perhaps Warren's support for dairy producers was part of a regional response to a real problem?

"Dairy farmers in New England are in crisis. We have lost 890 dairy farms (33%) in New England
over ten years. The federal milk marketing order system fails to take into account our regional costs of
production. The one minimal safety net available, the Milk Income Loss Contract program, expired
with the 2008 farm bill. Dairy farmers are New England’s 'anchor tenants' and maintain our landscape
and keep farm service providers and retailers in business. What policies do you support to ensure a solid
dairy industry in Massachusetts and New England?"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S 954 - Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013 - Key Vote

I don't support any policies that back subsidies from the public to the private sector.

Suppose you and I are manufacturers of the same product and we are competing for market share.

I hire a lobbyist and get legislation passed that gives me an economic advantage over you. The senator who originates the bill says it is for the common good. In 3 years I put you out of business, do you have any objections?

I would have serious objections.
Warren chose to run as a Democrat with all the corporate baggage that entails.
While she's a severe critic of Wall Street, that doesn't mean she sides with Main Street on every issue. I don't know the details of this particular "Reform" she authored; however, it is another good example (along with her hawkish foreign policy) for her supporters to slow down and judge her overall politics and not just her stand against Wall Street criminals.