Lieberman's ties

Looks like a swift well-timed call to action:

Activists are setting their sights on Hadassah Lieberman, launching a celebrity-studded petition drive to convince the nation's largest breast cancer non-profit to end the Connecticut senator's wife role as a spokeswoman.

The move to pressure the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation came the same day Lieberman's husband angered Democrats by announcing that he would not support an expansion of Medicare to cover individuals under the age of 55. Organizers did not point to that decision, instead citing Hadassah Lieberman's own ties to the health care industry.

Lieberman has worked as a consultant for companies including Pfizer and ALCO.

"We are asking Ellen DeGeneres, Christie Brinkley and other high-profile celebrities who are associated with Komen to demand that no more money raised for cancer treatment be given to Hadassah Lieberman or any other ex-Pharma/Insurance strategists," said Jane Hamsher, founder of the Firedoglake blog.

Yglesias is calling it a "murder/suicide" pact that Senators like Lieberman, Lincoln, and Nelson have out for killing any sort of Public Option in healthcare reform, while a "new national poll finds that fully one third of Democratic voters say that they're `less likely' to vote in 2010 if Congress doesn't pass a public option."

Tags: Lieberman (all tags)



Re: Lieberman's ties

Maybe I'm a concern troll, but I think many non-activist folks would see this as "going after his wife." Not a productive angle IMO.  

by Steve M 2009-12-14 01:20PM | 0 recs

so go after her, she was a lobbyist for Pfizer and's easy to tie that into her husband's political stances.

by ND22 2009-12-14 01:37PM | 0 recs
Re: True

Ok, you convinced yourself it's a productive tactic. Well done.

I think this makes it easier, not harder, for Holy Joe to play the martyr. There's activism that helps accomplish a goal and then there's activism that makes people feel proud of themselves for doing something.

by Steve M 2009-12-14 02:21PM | 0 recs
Oh I do to

but this morning, my first thought was "If I saw Joe Lieberman right now, he'd be lucky if all I did was spit on him"

Look, whatever we do, he's going to play the martyr, the media is going to let him, they're going to give him the biggest public blowjob ever and we're gonna lose.

So, you know what, if he takes us down, I want him and his wife and his entire family taken down with us.

What can I tell you? I'm Italian.

by ND22 2009-12-14 03:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman's ties

Yes, that seems to have already happened. Lawrence Jacobson of Legal Insurrection is calling it a Jihad against Hadassah.

But does anyone really care what Lawrence Jacobson thinks?

On the plus side, Jane's call has gotten coverage in Harper's and NPR. So it's having an effect.

I don't always agree with Jane (I feel for Harry Reid, he really does have the most thankless job in the country), but I trust her instincts.

by Charles Lemos 2009-12-14 03:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman's ties

not so sure that this is a good idea politically, even if merited in terms of what is "right"
 to do.

by jeopardy 2009-12-14 01:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman's ties

If a loved one of mine had suffered because of the abuses that Haddassah's clients had perpetuated, I want to get very personal with both Lieberpeople.  Corleone was wrong! Nothing is just business.  It's all personal.

This guy and his wife are lying hypocrites and should be expelled from civil society along with Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln, never mind the Democratic Party.

But Komen obviously cares more about keeping its friends in high places than breast cancer victims who can't get care because of rapacious insurance and drug companies.  Good to know.

by martinlomasney 2009-12-14 04:36PM | 0 recs
Maybe Joe is right; this is just a bad bill

At this point, is anyone here thinking about the real policy ramifications of the Senate bill?   Does anyone here sincerely believe that it represents sound public policy?

Medicare currently has $38 trillion in unfunded obligations over the next decade, with the hospital fund projected to be bankrupt by 2016. And that nasty Joe Lieberman, well, he somehow thinks it would be bad policy to allow people aged 55-64 to buy into Medicare, with the government subsidizing their purchases.

When people discuss how to deal with the long-range problems faced by Social Security, one alternative which is often floated is to raise the retirement age to 68.....I don't think I've ever heard anyone talk about lowering the eligibility age to, say, 55 as a solution to the problem.

Democrats are losing control of this entire debate because of insane proposals like this one: trying to bring another 50 million people into an entitlement program---Medicare---and then trying to convince the public that it will reduce costs. If Joe Lieberman is obstructing idiotic ideas like this one, then God Bless him.

by BJJ Fighter 2009-12-14 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Maybe Joe is right; this is just a bad bill

Sometimes we forget that Medicare is out of control and must be prevented from expanding at all costs, even though Medicare costs are growing at a slower rate than private-sector costs.  It's that inconvenient preference for facts over ideology that we have trouble overcoming.

by Steve M 2009-12-14 07:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Maybe Joe is right; this is just a bad bill

" $38 trillion in unfunded obligations over the next decade "

LOLZ, what RW propaganda site did you pick that up from?

First off the folk who buy-in into medicare would be paying their own way. Get the "buy-in" part of it?

On the subsidies - subsidies are being provided regardless if they choose medicare or go with some private plan. If you were concerned only about costs you would object to the subsidies themselves not medicare or PO.

Thirdly, it's only republicans who want to raise medicare eligibility to 67-68. Democrats have always recommend a buy-in for younger folk (who are also, gasp healthier),  Bill Clinton brought it up in his 1999 SoU and it was part of the Gore/Liberman 2000 platform. Hell, Lieberman himself brought it up in the senate 6 months ago.

by vecky 2009-12-14 10:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Maybe Joe is right; this is just a bad bill

I didn't even get to the " 50 million " people part. There are only 35 million people between the ages of 55-65. 1/3 of them are already on medicare/medicaid. The numbers expected to be eligible for the "buy-in" are less than 3 million or so.

by vecky 2009-12-14 10:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Maybe Joe is right; this is just a bad bill

The number for unfunded obligations doesn't come from a propaganda site; it comes from Medicare's own Board of Trustees, and was published earlier this year.

by BJJ Fighter 2009-12-15 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Maybe Joe is right; this is just a bad bill

That's the 80 year liability, not 10 as you claim. Facts please.

And medicare liability exists because medical costs have been rising faster than wages (medicare is paid for via payroll tax). So it's obvious if this trend continues a funding gap will emerge, unless additional funding is sought.

And of course medicare costs are rising slower than overall medical inflation. So folk on private insurance are going to be screwed far sooner than folk on medicare. In fact because of medicare's greater efficiencies and the reforms under debate in congress to payments, medicare will be solvent long after folk 65 and below can no longer afford private insurance.

by vecky 2009-12-15 10:44AM | 0 recs

what do those words mean to you?

They mean to me that those who would be added to said entitlement program WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT.

by ND22 2009-12-15 03:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman's ties

I was done with Lieberman's antics a long time ago  and can't believe that there is even talk about not having a public option. How can we be sitting around worrying about how much this will all cost when there is hard evidence confirming that the lack of affordable health care in this country is the cause of thousands of deaths every year. Our system is backwards and other countries have been laughing at us since WWII when a shortage of workers and a cap on wages forced business' to offer incentives such as health care. Of course there was money to made and the rest is history. We must release the stranglehold of big corporations and false information. The right wing calls this Socialism. We call it caring for fellow humans and more specifically, Americans.

by Adam Armstrong 2009-12-14 07:48PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads