<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 7.5 hours later</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/</link>
	<description>Let's just see what happens</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:24:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bileg</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/comment-page-1/#comment-53169</link>
		<dc:creator>Bileg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:24:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/#comment-53169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Disgusting and shameful.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Disgusting and shameful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pligg.com</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/comment-page-1/#comment-53130</link>
		<dc:creator>pligg.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:11:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/#comment-53130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;strong&gt;Joho the Blog Â» 7.5 hours later...&lt;/strong&gt;

Joho the Blog Â» 7.5 hours later...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Joho the Blog Â» 7.5 hours later&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Joho the Blog Â» 7.5 hours later&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bileg</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/comment-page-1/#comment-53125</link>
		<dc:creator>Bileg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 20:43:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/#comment-53125</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So now you are one of Obamaâ€™s cloven-hoofed minions. Disgusting.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So now you are one of Obamaâ€™s cloven-hoofed minions. Disgusting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lurkerfan</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/comment-page-1/#comment-53123</link>
		<dc:creator>lurkerfan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 16:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/#comment-53123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I too watched all I could, except when cable channels cut away for their obnoxious &quot;analysis.&quot; (We could not get a C-Span channel carrying it and had trouble with streaming video sites.)

I agree with all your points, but especially the first and last.  And I was surprised at all the comments about its being boring.  I also agree with all Terry&#039;s points, especially his last.

I don&#039;t see much chance for real democracy in our country as long as both parties are pro-business all the time.  Andrew Weiner&#039;s proclamation on the floor of the House that the Republican Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the health insurance industry could also be applied to a surprisingly large number of Democrats, especially in the Senate.  Glenn Greenwald points out how various Democrats are vehemently in favor of a progressive policy until they actually come close to having a chance to pass something.  Then they become very centrist -- see Sen. Rockefeller on the public option.

I&#039;ve long noted how Republican politicians dupe well-meaning citizens to vote against their own economical self-interest.  But I&#039;ve just recently tumbled to the realization that Democrats are also guilty of a similar, though somewhat more subtle, deceptive pattern.  It&#039;s not so much that they are inept; they are basically insincere.  See Sen. Dodd and Wall Street reforms.

We need a constitutional amendment to get big money and corporations out of elections.  I don&#039;t think we have a snowball&#039;s chance in hell of getting it, but I really believe it&#039;s the only real solution.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I too watched all I could, except when cable channels cut away for their obnoxious &#8220;analysis.&#8221; (We could not get a C-Span channel carrying it and had trouble with streaming video sites.)</p>
<p>I agree with all your points, but especially the first and last.  And I was surprised at all the comments about its being boring.  I also agree with all Terry&#8217;s points, especially his last.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see much chance for real democracy in our country as long as both parties are pro-business all the time.  Andrew Weiner&#8217;s proclamation on the floor of the House that the Republican Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the health insurance industry could also be applied to a surprisingly large number of Democrats, especially in the Senate.  Glenn Greenwald points out how various Democrats are vehemently in favor of a progressive policy until they actually come close to having a chance to pass something.  Then they become very centrist &#8212; see Sen. Rockefeller on the public option.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve long noted how Republican politicians dupe well-meaning citizens to vote against their own economical self-interest.  But I&#8217;ve just recently tumbled to the realization that Democrats are also guilty of a similar, though somewhat more subtle, deceptive pattern.  It&#8217;s not so much that they are inept; they are basically insincere.  See Sen. Dodd and Wall Street reforms.</p>
<p>We need a constitutional amendment to get big money and corporations out of elections.  I don&#8217;t think we have a snowball&#8217;s chance in hell of getting it, but I really believe it&#8217;s the only real solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Our Congress of Whores and the politics of meaning. Â» Callsign Snoopys Doghouse</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/comment-page-1/#comment-53021</link>
		<dc:creator>Our Congress of Whores and the politics of meaning. Â» Callsign Snoopys Doghouse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:55:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/#comment-53021</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] 7.5 hours later (hyperorg.com) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 7.5 hours later (hyperorg.com) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terry Steichen</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/comment-page-1/#comment-53016</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry Steichen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2010/02/25/7-5-hours-later/#comment-53016</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with all your points.  What was so disappointing is the absence of any convergence.  The underlying problem was that the Democrats had already compromised their plan, and moved it substantially toward Republican and conservative (read: pro-business) objectives.  It&#039;s hard to find reasonable common ground when you&#039;ve already done a lot of compromising.

Still, I think Obama did a reasonable job of making it clear that the Republicans don&#039;t think we can afford to extend coverage to more than 3 million (out of 50 million) uninsured.  And, that they also don&#039;t think we can afford to require that people with pre-existing conditions be given coverage.

The overall problem is that we&#039;ve become conditioned to equating &quot;having healthcare insurance&quot; with &quot;having healthcare.&quot;  99% of the complexity of the bills and the negotiations is because we keep dancing away from the stark reality that profit-seeking and health-seeking are orthogonal objectives.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with all your points.  What was so disappointing is the absence of any convergence.  The underlying problem was that the Democrats had already compromised their plan, and moved it substantially toward Republican and conservative (read: pro-business) objectives.  It&#8217;s hard to find reasonable common ground when you&#8217;ve already done a lot of compromising.</p>
<p>Still, I think Obama did a reasonable job of making it clear that the Republicans don&#8217;t think we can afford to extend coverage to more than 3 million (out of 50 million) uninsured.  And, that they also don&#8217;t think we can afford to require that people with pre-existing conditions be given coverage.</p>
<p>The overall problem is that we&#8217;ve become conditioned to equating &#8220;having healthcare insurance&#8221; with &#8220;having healthcare.&#8221;  99% of the complexity of the bills and the negotiations is because we keep dancing away from the stark reality that profit-seeking and health-seeking are orthogonal objectives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.370 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-06-16 15:08:28 -->