Good morning everyone!

I hope that when and if you have the time, MB will be the place for you to catch up with friends before you leave for work or start your new day. A place to relax and take a break from serious topics and discussions during your day.

You are free to talk about anything here. Introduce your favourite news stories, videos, photos, funny stories or recipes. Think of it as your space, whether you wake up with the birds or chose to have a lay in, MB is open 24/7, from 5 am EST-2 am PST.

Please feel free to drop in anytime, you are always welcome here.

Keith Olbermann has lost his Dad.

Sad News,  I really feel for Keith and his family.  I have  lost my Parents also, so has my Husband.  We know this territory and fully value that Keith has shared some of his difficult experience with his viewers.

Keith’s remarks are below with a link to his blog where you can leave a message.

Something that I truly respect about Keith is when the Healthcare debates began heating up, some political commentators were using their air time to  frighten people
and further divide our country  for their own profits,
Keith used his time on air to raise funds for Free Clinics not only to help raise awareness of the need for Healthcare reform but also to help the many thousands that had no where else to turn.

Keith, your Dad must have been quite a man to have raised a son like you.

Certainly One of the Best Persons in the World.

My father died, in the city of his birth, New York, at 3:50 EST this afternoon.

Though the financial constraints of his youth made college infeasible, he accomplished the near-impossible, becoming an architect licensed in 40 states. Much of his work was commercial, for a series of shoe store chains and department stores. There was a time in the 1970’s when nearly all of the Baskin-Robbins outlets in the country had been built to his design, and under his direction. Through much of my youth and my early adult life, it was almost impossible to be anywhere in this country and not be a short drive to one of “his” stores.

My Dad was predeceased last year by my mother, Marie, his wife of nearly 60 years. He died peacefully after a long fight against the complications that ensued after successful colon surgery last September at the New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical Center. My sister Jenna and I were at his side, and I was reading him his favorite James Thereby short stories, as he left us.

I can’t say enough about Dr. Jeff Milsom and his team at the hospital, and all of those physicians and nurses and staffers in the Surgical Intensive Care Unit who looked after my Dad all this time, and kept him in their hearts. And I feel the same way about all of you who have expressed your best wishes and prayers to him, and to me, and to our family.

My Dad was my biggest booster. A day after I was hired by CNN in the summer of 1981 as a two-week vacation relief sports reporter, I traveled by train to my childhood hometown, and walked from the station towards my folks’ house. I was stopped half a dozen times before I got to my Dad’s office by people congratulating me on my impending television debut. There was, of course, only one way they could have known. My Dad, the press agent.

Of course it was he and my Mom who took me to my first Yankees games (even though my father nursed a delightful grudge against the team for trading away his favorite players, Steve Souchock and Snuffy Stirnweiss - in 1948 and 1950). But as my interest in the sport began to take the shape of a dreamt-of career, it was my Dad also sacrificed family vacations so we could buy ever more tickets to Yankee games. When we could afford both games and vacations, four times those vacations were to Spring Training.

He was my inspiration, and will always remain so. His bravery these last six months cannot be measured. He is as much my hero now, as he was when I was five years old.

Click for Keith Olberman’s Blog

Texas has just officially doomed generations of their children to ignorance and being oddities in their grasp of history and reality…because neither of those items supported the political views of conservatives and Republicans.

I normally keep my quotes to a minimum but there is so much outrageousness here, I couldn’t pare it down:

From the NY Times:

Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change

By James C. Mckinley Jr.
March 12, 2010

After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

Efforts by Hispanic board members to include more Latino figures as role models for the state’s large Hispanic population were consistently defeated, prompting one member, Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out of a meeting late Thursday night, saying, “They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist.”

“They are going overboard, they are not experts, they are not historians,” she said. “They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world.”

There are seven members of the conservative bloc on the board, but they are often joined by one of the other three Republicans on crucial votes. There were no historians, sociologists or economists consulted at the meetings, though some members of the conservative bloc held themselves out as experts on certain topics.

“I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state,” said David Bradley, a conservative from Beaumont who works in real estate. “I have $1,000 for the charity of your choice if you can find it in the Constitution.”

They also included a plank to ensure that students learn about “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.”

Dr. McLeroy, a dentist by training, pushed through a change to the teaching of the civil rights movement to ensure that students study the violent philosophy of the Black Panthers in addition to the nonviolent approach of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He also made sure that textbooks would mention the votes in Congress on civil rights legislation, which Republicans supported.

“Republicans need a little credit for that,” he said. “I think it’s going to surprise some students.”

Mr. Bradley won approval for an amendment saying students should study “the unintended consequences” of the Great Society legislation, affirmative action and Title IX legislation. He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians as well as Japanese were interned in the United States during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

Other changes seem aimed at tamping down criticism of the right. Conservatives passed one amendment, for instance, requiring that the history of McCarthyism include “how the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government.” The Venona papers were transcripts of some 3,000 communications between the Soviet Union and its agents in the United States.

In economics, the revisions add Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek, two champions of free-market economic theory, among the usual list of economists to be studied, like Adam Smith, Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes. They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Terri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

In the field of sociology, another conservative member, Barbara Cargill, won passage of an amendment requiring the teaching of “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” in a section on teenage suicide, dating violence, sexuality, drug use and eating disorders.

“The topic of sociology tends to blame society for everything,” Ms. Cargill said.

Even the course on world history did not escape the board’s scalpel.

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

“The Enlightenment was not the only philosophy on which these revolutions were based,” Ms. Dunbar said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html?scp=1&sq=texas%20education&st=cse

This could be a very large post, but I will try to boil it down to what I perceive as the essentials.

What is the REAL problem with health care in America?  I believe the lack of socialized medicine is not the problem.  Or, more precisely, socialized medicine is not the cure.  Here’s one tiny example of how private health care can actually work.

I recently joined a medical group on the West coast of America called Kaiser Permanente.  They are a single payer non profit system.  Given their status, they have every reason to digitize their records and introduce efficiency at every stage of the operation to save money.  To date, they have achieved their goal.  This story is about my relationship with Kaiser and how they have responded to my needs.  I make no claims that my experience is homogeneous.   I’m sure some of the more taxed Kaiser facilities will give different experiences.

That being said.  I’ve had two experiences that have molded my view of this particular organization.  The first was with my wife.

Cindy is my wife.  One night, she woke me from sleep writhing in agony.  She felt like she wanted to vomit and her whole body was cramping.  It was horrible to witness.  I walked her out to my car and drove her to the Hayward emergency Kaiser facility.  Not 10 minutes away.  I slid her Kaiser ID card through the magnetic reader and the printer spit out a tag that I wrapped around her wrist.   Within 5 minutes, a nurse guided us into a private room where we were asked a series of questions including how much pain was being experienced and where.  Immediately, the nurse directed us out a door opposite the one we came in which was the emergency room proper.  Cindy was laid down on a gurney and administered morphine.  Then a cart came with an ultrasound device and they checked the area where she was experiencing pain.   It turns out she had an attack of pancreatitis (sic?).  During all this, her primary care physician was contacted at home and was administering advice on how to deal with this including an immediate MRI.  Cindy got the MRI and after all was said and done, she was fine and the pain was gone.  This all happened in a period of about four hours.

I challenge a for profit hospital to do the same thing as efficiently.

My next experience was with myself.  I had a bad blood sugar attack one day that led me to the Dr’s.  My hyperglycemia was wreaking havoc with my system causing me to be confused.  I was concerned that I was getting adult onset diabetes.   So, I approached my Dr and using a computer he prescribed an entire blood analysis.  He checked off everything from liver and kidney function to blood sugar and cholesterol.  Oh, and he threw in vitamin D deficiency among others.  I walked out of the Dr office and across the court to the lab and waited five minutes for my name to be called.  Then they took three blood tests and had me deliver a urine sample.

This is where the genius of Kaiser comes in.  within two hours, my blood tests started streaming into my email box.  The exact test results along with what is considered acceptable ranges.  Also, a hotlink to a web site that explains the test itself.  These tests are also copied to my Dr who then calls me and follows up with solutions to my health problems.  ALL AUTOMATICALLY.

Kaiser is a machine.  The perfect example of how health care needs to be ran in this country.

Kaiser is affordable.  Kaiser has no limits on what kind of service you can have and for how long.  Kaiser delivers it’s own meds so it controls costs.  It’s perfect.  One time I actually emailed my Dr when my lower back went out and he simply electronically ordered vicodin and a muscle relaxer delivered to the pharmacy.  No Dr visit needed.

The whole point of this is this:  If government sponsored health care was this efficient, they could cover everyone for little to no cost.   The fantastical solution to our health care problems doesn’t need to be an elaborate capital hill solution.  it just needs to be ran in an efficient manner by efficient people.

When AdLib said he was going out of town I said I would cover the music night thread again since taking a break. So I thought this theme was apropos. I have fun doing the music thread but I just got tired of hearing what I wanted to hear and see what other members taste in music was. I love covers because they are different, not necessarily better than the original and most times not, but just different. The bigger the difference the interpretation from the original song the better.

In My Life – Dave Mathews – Beatles Cover (I could probably do a whole post on Beatles’ covers alone but I stopped at two)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Strawberry Fields Forever – Candy Flip – Beatles Cover

Click here to view the embedded video.

Another Brick in the Wall – KoRn – Pink Floyd Cover

Click here to view the embedded video.

Smells Like Teen Spirit (Remix) – Tori Amos – Nirvana Cover

Click here to view the embedded video.

Message in a Bottle – Sting – The Police (Sting covers his own song)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Billy Jean – Chris Cornell – Micheal Jackson Cover

Click here to view the embedded video.

Stand By Me – Playing for Change – Song Around the World

Click here to view the embedded video.

lemme know what you think..

be BRUTAL!!!!

..

..

..

On SARAH PALIN:

She said she’d attend the Convention.

Old Sarah still craved the attention.

She wrote on her hand,

copped one hundred grand,

then “donated” it to her own pension.

= = = = = = = = = =

She calls for a new revolution,

“We must ply to the strict Constitution”!

When asked what that meant,

her knowledge was spent..

and the rest was just more noise pollution.

= = = = = = = = = =

On CHENEY:

There once was a V.P. named Cheney,

Whose “vision” was bitter & grainy.

He tortured & swore

that we needed a war

but he turned out much worse than Khomeini.

= = = = = = = = = =

(variation)

There’s a putrid old fascist named Cheney

who delights in the concept of pain, he

denies that the cries

that his try’s to baptize

reap just more useless lies than Khomeini.

= = = = = = = = = =

On RACHEL MADDOW vs AARON SCHOCK:

There’s a vapid young freshman named Aaron

whose worldview is woefully barren.

He was clearly miscast

and was tied to the mast

When “Rach” made his world Sub Saharan.

= = = = = = = = = =

There once was a Gooper named Schock

whose spiel was a typical crock.

It was almost a crime

he was given the time

to watch Maddow just clean out his clock.

= = = = = = = = = =

On JOHN BOEHNER:

There’s a GOP lackey named Boehner

Who, for all intents, looks like a stoner,

He’d forgotten his task

to top his hip flask

filled entirely of orange skin toner.

= = = = = = = = = =

The Minority Leader was shaken.

A finger wagging was taken.

So he hemmed & he hawed,

‘tho his snit was a fraud

‘Cause he knew he was no Francis Bacon.

= = = = = = = = = =

On the CPAC CONVENTION:

So, they’re holding a cute, little meeting

where Limbaugh will keep overeating.

Beck will chalk the same croc

Dick will stock an ad-hoc

with Uranium needing depleting.

= = = = = = = = = =

On REPUBLICAN OBSTRUCTION:

All they want is to block & obstruct

any progress they feel should be chucked.

They’d rather still stay

then betray their cliche

of a time when their “values” just sucked.

= = = = = = = = = =

They bleat & they fete for “more jobs”.

They lob “blobs of green gobs” at the mobs.

Yet when Bills are proposed

their minds stay clamped closed

so they’ll recommence humping Lou Dobbs.

= = = = = = = = = = =

On HEALTH CARE REFORM:

They strive for a new “Waterloo”

by giving our Health Bill the flu.

But their pale rail will fail

as this ship has set sail

so we’ll bid their stale milieu adieu.

= = = = = = = = = = =

The wingers were set to make merry..

Our Bill they were ready to bury.

But then came this “twist”,

Some new grain for the grist.

Punked AGAIN, were they?

“Yes indeed, VERY!”

= = = = = = = = = = =

On GLENN BECK:

There’s this broadcast bufffoon known as Glenn,

who prays to the DEV!L (amen!).

He insights racial fights

‘tll some fan kills non-whites

which come to pass not “if” but WHEN.

= = = = = = = = = =

On NEWT GINGRICH:

There’s a throwback right winger named Newt

whose delusions remain so acute

that he inks what he thinks

will prove links he thinks stinks

but his foot, in the end, he will shoot.

= = = = = = = = = =

On BIPARTISANSHIP, the GOP CAUCUS & the HEALT CARE SUMMIT:

“Can’t we all get along?”, asked the Pres..

but they couldn’t care less what he says.

They’ll admit they don’t fit

& will quit with a snit

just like Lucy & Desi Arnaz.

= = = = = = = = = =

(variation)

“Let’s discuss this out front”, said the Pres..

but they couldn’t care less what he says.

When they cease to transmit,

they just quit with a snit

just like Lucy & Desi Arnaz.

= = = = = = = = = = =

On RON PAUL:

There once was a looney named Paul

who would like-minded loonies entrall.

He’d replace the black race

just in case they’d erase

his delusional masquerade ball.

= = = = = = = = = =

On COLIN POWELL’S DISCLOSURES:

We had a great General named Powell

who needed to throw in the towel.

His supply of a lie

went awry (my oh my)

Now he’s paying Dick back with a vowel.

= = = = = = = = = =

On JIM BUNNING:

There’s a putrid old winger named Bunning

who feels unemployed people need shunning.

His crusade to cease aid

I’m afraid did cascade

to his running when people came gunning.

= = = = = = = = = =

On JOHN KYL:

= = = = = = = = = =

There once was a winger named, KYL

who was to all working people hostile.

He believes they are thieves

as he weaves his pet peeves

into a mountainous steaming coiled pile.

= = = = = = = = = = =

&.. last but not least.. BART STUPAK:

A Congressional throwback named Stupak

who constantly flacks through his butt-crack

his tack to set back

womens rights with a whack

is just merely a hack at his nut-sac.

==

 This the 3rd Temple Menorah, hopefully a fitting representation of what I am about to write.

               __________________________________________________

I will be writing this article from memory and personal experience in an attempt to provide an understanding of why there is a movement of Protestant embrace of the Old Testement by a portion of believers. 

             __________________________________________________

                                                 What would Jesus Do?

This question has become iconic in our society and each persons personal faith provides their answer.  Most of us would agree that Jesus was a Jew devout to his faith. So what would Jesus do? Would he eat pork? Consider the Sabbath as Sunday? Celebrate Christmas or Easter? What Law was Jesus referring to when he spoke ” I have not come to change the Law, but to fulfill it”?  

 Jesus was devout to the Laws of Judaism set down in the Old Testament.  Like most faiths there were different sects of his faith at the time and exactly which one he would be associated with is still being debated to this day. But it still would have been the interpretation of Old Testament Law. 

 Our modern views about some subjects are in direct conflict of this Law.  How one resolves this conflict is their own personal journey.

                __________________________________________________

                                                            Rejection of The Roman

Suffice it to say you can’t be Protestant and Catholic. To avoid stepping on toes I won’t go in to detail, but the journey that led me to more of an Old Testament based Faith was rejecting just about everything that had a direct connection to the Roman Catholic Church, including holidays, certain beliefs, narratives  and practices. There is a small segment or radical Protestants whose bigotry and prejudices are the center of their rejection of the Roman, but for many and for myself  it was more about how the Faith was founded, what it was based upon, how it’s doctrine was developed and it’s history.

                        __________________________________________________

                                                                     Revelations

To understand the End Times Evangelical World View and why they have moved into Politics and business with it, you need to learn about their interpretation of the Book of Revelations. After all without this little gem of a book there would be no Bibical End Times to interpret.  The symbols in this book  have entered our modern vernacular, Seven Seals, Armageddon and the infamous “666″.

 Numerous best sellers have been written about this book including Hal Lindsay’s “Late Great Planet Earth”. This book and it’s interpretation of End Times Prophecy could be considered the Flame that Lit the Fire. Basically the return of Israel as a Nation State is what got this ball rolling and it has been gaining momentum ever since.

So, The Temple is rebuilt, Jesus returns, the Jews accept him as the Messiah, The Anti-Christ and Satan are defeated and Jesus rules a perfect world for a 1000 years.  Being that he is Jewish by birth and faith my guess it will be based on Judaic Law found in the Old Testament. Jesus will be taking his Throne in a Jewish Temple rebuilt for the Messiah of the Jewish people. Thats New Testement for the Old Testement. 

                   __________________________________________________

When an End Times Evangelical or Protestant takes a stance based on Old Testament Scripture or Law and I see someone questioning that stance as how or why they use the Old Testament, I always think why not?  There isn’t a whole lot of Law laid down by Yahweh in the New Testament and Yashua interpreted the Old Testament Law by expanding it to the “thought police” version of Sin. The New Testament is mostly interpreted by believers whereas the Old Testament Law doesn’t leave much for interpretation. Most Christian denominations base their Doctrines on Homosexuality for instance on the Old Testament, mainly because it really isn’t approached in the New Testament.

Most people cherry pick scriptures for their point counter point, and I hope what little I covered helps with understanding the use of the Old Testament.

As for my personal journey I eventually removed myself so far from the Roman I became deeply involved with the “Messianic Judaism” movement.    

p.s. don’t knock dancing with snakes if you haven’t tried it   

Yes this ad trying to destroy the democratic process was actually linked on a so called progressive website. I could be wrong but I doubt even people who want to kill the bill out of principle on the left don’t want to block the democratic process. I really don’t know what to say but this is way too over the top.

Please keep this in Speakers Corner.

I’m busy. We don’t want somebody sitting back saying you’re not holding the mop the right way.

Why don’t you grab a mop? Why don’t you help clean up?

“You’re not mopping fast enough.”

“That’s a socialist mop.”

Grab a mop! Let’s get to work.  ~~President Barak Obama

The American people by a popular majority of more than eight million votes selected as their President a candidate who had been attacked by his Republican foe as a radical who “began his campaign in the liberal left lane of politics and has never left it.”

If only. In truth, Barack Obama was never the Mao in pinstripes that the rightwing attack machine conjured up. His record on Capitol Hill was never “more liberal than a Senator who calls himself a socialist [Vermont's Bernie Sanders],” as John McCain wheezed at the last stops of a dying campaign. And he has never even been in competition for the title bestowed upon him by former Senator Fred Thompson during last summer’s Republican National Convention: “the most liberal . . . nominee to ever run for President.”

Thompson had apparently forgotten not just George McGovern but Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis, all of whom sought the Presidency as more left-leaning contenders than did Obama in 2008. And, as McGovern, an able historian, himself reminds us: Franklin Roosevelt put contemporary Democrats to shame when it came to embracing and advancing radical notions.

For we Liberals and Progressives, who find ourselves moving from the easy opposition stance of the Bush-Cheney horror to the more challenging position of dealing with the first Democratic President elected with something akin to a mandate since Lyndon Johnson in 1964, it is important to see Barack Obama for who he is and his administration for what it can be. The best way to do this is by hearing the President in his own words.

After he secured the delegates required to claim the Democratic nomination, Obama found himself at a town hall meeting in suburban Atlanta, where he was grilled about whether having run as a primary season Progressive he was now shifting to the center.

The Senator was clearly offended by the suggestion.

“Let me talk about the broader issue, this whole notion that I am shifting to the center or that I’m flip-flopping or this or that or the other,” he began. “You know, the people who say this apparently haven’t been listening to me.”

“I am somebody who is no doubt Progressive. I believe in a tax code that we need to make more fair. I believe in universal health care. I believe in making college affordable. I believe in paying our teachers more money. I believe in early childhood education. I believe in a whole lot of things that make me progressive.”

I believe him. Those were not casually chosen words. Barack Obama knows exactly what it means to say he is a “Progressive,” and he actually understands the subtle nuances of the American left. This is a man who moved to Chicago to be part of the political moment that began with the 1983 election of leftie Congressman Harold Washington as the city’s first African American mayor, who studied the organizing techniques of Saul “Rules for Radicals” Alinsky, who worked with proudly radical labor leaders to defend basic industries and avert layoffs, who used his Harvard-educated legal skills to fight for expanded voting rights, who was mentored by civil libertarian legislator and federal judge Abner Mikva, who discussed the intricacies of Middle East policy with Edward Said and Rashid Khalidi, and who learned about single-payer health care from his old friend and neighbor Dr. Quentin Young, the longtime coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program. And, famously, Obama did not just make anti-war sounds before Iraq was invaded, he appeared at an anti-war rally in downtown Chicago with a “War Is Not an Option” sign waving at his side.

Barack Obama ran for the Illinois state senate as a candidate endorsed by the New Party, the labor-left movement of the mid-1990s that declared “the social, economic, and political progress of the United States requires a democratic revolution in America-the return of power to the people.” In those days, he was blunt about his desire to move the Democratic Party off the cautious center where Bill Clinton had wedged it. When he positioned himself for a 2004 U.S. Senate run, Obama said that he saw Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold-the lone dissenter against the Patriot Act-as the best role model in the chamber.

I celebrated Obama’s election as a victory for what the late Paul Wellstone described as “the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.” But knowing the ideals and values of the left is not the same as practicing them. As a Senator, Obama did not take Feingold as a role model. In fact, they differed on essential constitutional, trade, and Presidential accountability issues, with Obama consistently taking more cautiously Centrist positions. One of Obama’s first votes in the Senate was to confirm Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State. Dr. Young wrote to his friend. “I told him I was disappointed in him,” the veteran campaigner for peace and social and economic justice recalled. “Rice was the embodiment of everything that was wrong with this Administration. So, he called me back and he said: ‘Why didn’t you pick up the phone and call me? Do you think Bush would ever send to the Senate a nominee for Secretary of State who I could vote for? I said: ‘You are the constitutional lawyer. It’s about advice and consent, right? You should have denied him your consent.’ ”

The lesson that should be taken away from the Rice vote, and from the disappointments that have followed it, ought not be that Obama is a hopeless case. In fact, quite the opposite. In that conversation with Young, Senator Obama outlined the relationship that the left ought to develop with President Obama.

Obama was nominated and elected in 2008 by Independents and by Progressives, both younger tech-savvy activists who made his candidacy an early favorite of the blogosphere and old-school liberal precinct walkers like me. The Senator won the Democratic nomination because he was the only first-tier contender who could say that he had opposed authorizing Bush to take the country to war with Iraq. In the Iowa caucuses that would define the 2008 race, those anti-war credentials, above all other factors, made the young Senator from Illinois a contender.

Similarly, as he campaigned in key states such as Wisconsin, Obama’s call for a new approach to free trade agreements and for massive infrastructure investments allowed him to secure backing from labor and liberal farm activists at critical stages in the process. The Progressives who committed to Obama early on were the essential foot soldiers of his long march through the caucuses, the primaries, and the fall campaign. These activists formed a base within the campaign and the Democratic Party, centered on –but not limited to –the Obama team’s open website and blog, www.MyBarackObama.com, which did not always cheerlead for the candidate. In June, when Obama broke with Feingold and other Senate Progressives to support Bush’s rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the Senator felt enough heat from his own and independent netroots sites that he was compelled to explain himself, making what Obama described as a “firm pledge” that he would revisit the issue as President to shore up privacy protections.

What Internet activists such as OpenLeft.com’s Matt Stoller did during the FISA fight was roughly equivalent to what Obama told Dr. Young to do back in 2005: “Pick up the phone and call me.” Netroots activists made themselves heard and earned a response from then-candidate Obama. And they can do much more with respect to President Obama. The netroots can get the public engaged, but instead, they have made the public demoralized. Instead of providing suggestions, they have only complained. They have been reactive and not proactive.

One way to influence Obama and his Administration is to speak– not so much to him– as to America. Progressives need to get out ahead of the President. Highlight the right appointees and the right responses to deal with the challenges that matter most. Advance big ideas and organize on their behalf; identify allies in federal agencies, especially in Congress, and work with them to dial up the pressure for progress. I am not seeing much of that at all—but I am seeing a daily barrage of criticism. I am not seeing any discussion of what has been accomplished or what we specifically want accomplished. Indeed, we could take a lesson from rightwing pressure groups in their dealings with Republican administrations and recognize that it is always better to build the bandwagon than to jump on board one that is crafted with the tools of compromise. Don’t just critique, but rather propose.

Sixty activists from The California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee, Physicians for a National Health Program, and Progressive Democrats of America and allied groups met one week after Election Day at the AFL-CIO headquarters in Washington with Michigan Congressman John Conyers, an early Obama backer and the chief House proponent of real reform, to forge a Single-Payer Healthcare Alliance and plot specific strategies for influencing the new Administration and Congress.

The point wasn’t to teach Obama about single-payer. Seven years ago, he told the Illinois AFLCIO: “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody . . . a singlepayer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”

Since then, Democrats have taken back the House, the Senate, and the White House, but perhaps in name only. We have learned since the election that too many who call themselves Democrats are only Democrats on some issues. Single-payer was never on the table, and in retrospect, I can see why not. The President’s statements, his strategies, and his appointments evidence a caution born of the political and structural pressures faced by every President. Whether the previous, more progressive Obama still exists remains to be seen. I still believe it does. But the only way to determine if Obama really is the Progressive he claimed in 2008 to be is to push not just Obama, but the public and the media. I am frustrated every day when I watch the political pundits –and not only those on the Right—claim that the public is opposed to Health Care Reform. Why do they think Obama won? It was the central item of his agenda!

The often quoted example of Franklin Roosevelt is still  good to remember. After his election in 1932, FDR met with Sidney Hillman and other labor leaders, many of them active Socialists with whom he had worked over the past decade or more. Hillman and his allies arrived with plans they wanted the new President to implement. Roosevelt told them: “I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it.”

It is reasonable for Progressives to assume that Barack Obama agrees with them on many fundamental issues. He has said as much. It is equally reasonable for Progressives to assume that Barack Obama wants to do the right thing. But it is necessary for Progressives to understand that, as with Roosevelt, they will have to make Obama do it.

I have never worked so hard as a citizen to get what I voted for. That’s fine; this is the new reality. I can’t say how much difference the involvement of Progressive activists has made, because it is impossible to prove a negative. Where would we be if we’d never emailed and called our representatives? I believe HCR would have died last August. I believe there might not be a second stimulus. I think financial reforms would be forgotten–as well as a host of other mopping chores we still need to accomplish. Congress is cowardly and lazy, and if Progressives don’t push, be certain the Right will win. To paraphrase Roy Scheider’s character in the movie Jaws, “We’re gonna need a bigger mop.”