PDA

View Full Version : kudos to president obama



PDXsooner
3/9/2010, 07:16 AM
i just wanted to throw out a kudos to president obama. i think he's doing a decent job so far. with the situation he inherited it's been an extremely tough job, but he's holding his own. not perfect, but i'm excited about him as he moves into the next three and most likely 7 years...

PDXsooner
3/9/2010, 07:18 AM
Here's a good article regarding his first year:

The Fat Lady Has Sung

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: February 20, 2010

A small news item from Tracy, Calif., caught my eye last week. Local station CBS 13 reported: “Tracy residents will now have to pay every time they call 911 for a medical emergency. But there are a couple of options. Residents can pay a $48 voluntary fee for the year, which allows them to call 911 as many times as necessary. Or there’s the option of not signing up for the annual fee. Instead they will be charged $300 if they make a call for help.”

Welcome to the lean years.

Yes, sir, we’ve just had our 70 fat years in America, thanks to the Greatest Generation and the bounty of freedom and prosperity they built for us. And in these past 70 years, leadership — whether of the country, a university, a company, a state, a charity, or a township — has largely been about giving things away, building things from scratch, lowering taxes or making grants.

But now it feels as if we are entering a new era, “where the great task of government and of leadership is going to be about taking things away from people,” said the Johns Hopkins University foreign policy expert Michael Mandelbaum.

Indeed, to lead now is to trim, to fire or to downsize services, programs or personnel. We’ve gone from the age of government handouts to the age of citizen givebacks, from the age of companions fly free to the age of paying for each bag.

Let’s just hope our lean years will only number seven. That will depend a lot on us and whether we rise to the economic challenges of this moment. Our parents truly were the Greatest Generation. We, alas, in too many ways, have been what the writer Kurt Andersen called “The Grasshopper Generation,” eating through the prosperity that was bequeathed us like hungry locusts. Now we and our kids together need to be “The Regeneration” — the generation that renews, refreshes, re-energizes and rebuilds America for the 21st century.

President Obama’s bad luck was that he showed up just as we moved from the fat years to the lean years. His calling is to lead The Regeneration. He clearly understands that in his head, but he has yet to give full voice to it. Actually, the thing that most baffles me about Mr. Obama is how a politician who speaks so well, and is trying to do so many worthy things, can’t come up with a clear, simple, repeatable narrative to explain his politics — when it is so obvious.

Mr. Obama won the election because he was able to “rent” a significant number of independent voters — including Republican business types who had never voted for a Democrat in their lives — because they knew in their guts that the country was on the wrong track and was desperately in need of nation-building at home and that John McCain was not the man to do it.

They thought that Mr. Obama, despite his liberal credentials, had the unique skills, temperament, voice and values to pull the country together for this new Apollo program — not to take us to the moon, but into the 21st century.

Alas, though, instead of making nation-building in America his overarching narrative and then fitting health care, energy, educational reform, infrastructure, competitiveness and deficit reduction under that rubric, the president has pursued each separately. This made each initiative appear to be just some stand-alone liberal obsession to pay off a Democratic constituency — not an essential ingredient of a nation-building strategy — and, therefore, they have proved to be easily obstructed, picked off or delegitimized by opponents and lobbyists.

So “Obamism” feels at worst like a hodgepodge, at best like a to-do list — one that got way too dominated by health care instead of innovation and jobs — and not the least like a big, aspirational project that can bring out America’s still vast potential for greatness.

To be sure, taking over the presidency at the dawn of the lean years is no easy task. The president needs to persuade the country to invest in the future and pay for the past — past profligacy — all at the same time. We have to pay for more new schools and infrastructure than ever, while accepting more entitlement cuts than ever, when public trust in government is lower than ever.

On top of that, the Republican Party has never been more irresponsible. Having helped run the deficit to new heights during the recent Bush years, the G.O.P. is now unwilling to take any responsibility for dealing with it if it involves raising taxes. At the same time, the rise of cable TV has transformed politics in our country generally into just another spectator sport, like all-star wrestling. C-Span is just ESPN with only two teams. We watch it for entertainment, not solutions.

While it would certainly help if the president voiced a more compelling narrative, I am under no illusion that this alone would solve all his problems and ours. It comes back to us: We have to demand the truth from our politicians and be ready to accept it ourselves. We simply do not have another presidency to waste. There are no more fat years to eat through. If Obama fails, we all fail.

TheHumanAlphabet
3/9/2010, 07:49 AM
I am glad you have your opinion, I have mine and I hope Obama fails. I do not like his view of the world or the U.S.

Bourbon St Sooner
3/9/2010, 08:05 AM
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss


The first pol that gets up and says that we need to raise the SS retirement age to 70, I will applaud. Meanwhile the entitlement time bomb ticks.

StoopTroup
3/9/2010, 08:07 AM
Who will lead us after teh Obama fails?

SoonerProphet
3/9/2010, 08:11 AM
meh, i am just keepin my mouth shut

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/9/2010, 08:21 AM
i just wanted to throw out a kudos to president obama. i think he's doing a decent job so far. with the situation he inherited it's been an extremely tough job, but he's holding his own. not perfect, but i'm excited about him as he moves into the next three and most likely 7 years...Yeah, huh? We've always looked forward to his arrival.

delhalew
3/9/2010, 03:06 PM
OH MY GAWD:D

TheHumanAlphabet
3/9/2010, 04:24 PM
The first pol that gets up and says that we need to raise the SS retirement age to 70, I will applaud. Meanwhile the entitlement time bomb ticks.

Agree with this. SS is more broke than health care - but obammy wants to take over 17% of the economy and get us stuck to the teat of the gubment... London just raised its city tax to 50% to earners over 150,000 pounds (~250-300K roughly?). Why in the world would anyone want us to be like Europe, the UK or Canada???

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/9/2010, 04:37 PM
Why in the world would anyone want us to be like Europe, the UK or Canada???'Cuz 'merica is the BAD GUYS! Our winning ways need severe curtailment, since all peoples are equal and Karl Marx is THE BOMB! Give give give, til you say "ef it", like those on welfare have for yrs. When those in govt. and their supporteres have it all, the world will be in proper balance...Now, STOP ASKING QUESTIONS, and simply COMPLY(if you know what's good for you)

BTW, give us those guns...and, yes, THOSE FISHING RODS!

StoopTroup
3/9/2010, 04:40 PM
Running a Campaign and having signs like "ME 2012" will be fun to watch.

StoopTroup
3/9/2010, 04:42 PM
It's time we put an Irish Guy in the Whitehouse IMO....maybe we shouldn't drive him around in a Convertible this time.

Chuck Bao
3/9/2010, 04:59 PM
I agree. President Obama has done a reasonable job. For the first time in 18 months, I am actually turning slightly more optimistic on the economic front.

C&CDean
3/9/2010, 05:07 PM
Jeezus we not only need a politics board, we need a stupid politics board. This would be the first thread moved over there.

Bourbon St Sooner
3/9/2010, 05:14 PM
For the first time in 18 months, I am actually turning slightly more optimistic on the economic front.

I'm wondering based on what exactly?

Consumer confidence? No
Jobs? No
Sales? No

C&CDean
3/9/2010, 05:15 PM
Asian market? Yes?

Chuck Bao
3/9/2010, 05:19 PM
Jeezus we not only need a politics board, we need a stupid politics board. This would be the first thread moved over there.

Heh! You are too funny, Dean. You make it sound like there could ever be a smart politics forum on this board.

olevetonahill
3/9/2010, 05:25 PM
Opinions are Like *******s and theres a lot of em out there and in here:pop:

85Sooner
3/9/2010, 05:29 PM
Obama will go down in history as the first marxist president of this country. FDR was merely socialist. He also will have done more harm to this country in 4 years than the last 5 presidents combined.
I am starting to believe his supporters should show their pride in him by wearing arm bands so we know who they are.......... and can avoid them at all costs.

starclassic tama
3/9/2010, 05:48 PM
I am glad you have your opinion, I have mine and I hope Obama fails. I do not like his view of the world or the U.S.

why would you want any president of the country you live in to fail?

Leroy Lizard
3/9/2010, 06:52 PM
He's going to screw up our educational system at the least. (More than it is screwed up now.)

XingTheRubicon
3/9/2010, 06:58 PM
http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/5301/photo01hires.jpg (http://img44.imageshack.us/i/photo01hires.jpg/)

olevetonahill
3/9/2010, 11:58 PM
He's going to screw up our educational system at the least. (More than it is screwed up now.)

Oh shat !
Fer sure ? say it aint so .

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 12:38 AM
Fer sure.

MrJimBeam
3/10/2010, 05:56 AM
why would you want any president of the country you live in to fail?

If the Presidents mission was to change everything that made the country I live in different and special why would I want him to succeed?

Crucifax Autumn
3/10/2010, 09:08 AM
http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/5301/photo01hires.jpg (http://img44.imageshack.us/i/photo01hires.jpg/)

Looks like Lizard has a slight lead over LAS at the moment, but he seems to be tiring out.

:D

OklahomaTuba
3/10/2010, 09:58 AM
I think he's also done a great job as well in my opinion:

- I still have a good job, unlike many affected by the Hope and Change, and I got an outrageous bonus on top if it.

- He's single handedly brought the GOP back to life

- His agenda is falling apart and taking the donks with it

- He's turning blue states red nearly overnight

- He's completely squandered a filibuster proof majority in congress

- Showing every day the "failed policies of the last eight years" actually worked, so he is now starting to use them.

- Continuing vital programs like the Patriot Act, warrentless wiretapping (And then some!) committed to success in Iraq, He's keeping Gitmo open and keeping on with the GWOT (even if he won't call it that)

Hell, he may be Jimmy Carter II, but we needed Jimmy to have a Ronaldus Magnus, so its all working out ok so far, even if he's lost 4 million+ jobs.

OULenexaman
3/10/2010, 09:58 AM
i just wanted to throw out a kudos to president obama. i think he's doing a decent job so far. with the situation he inherited it's been an extremely tough job, but he's holding his own. not perfect, but i'm excited about him as he moves into the next three and most likely 7 years...

Have you hugged a tree today??

TheHumanAlphabet
3/10/2010, 10:00 AM
I agree. President Obama has done a reasonable job. For the first time in 18 months, I am actually turning slightly more optimistic on the economic front.

What, pray tell, has obammy done for the economy of APac and the world, let alone the U.S.?

OklahomaTuba
3/10/2010, 10:01 AM
Ouch...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_total_approval_graphics/march_2010/obama_total_approval_march_10_2010/294136-1-eng-US/obama_total_approval_march_10_2010.jpg

TheHumanAlphabet
3/10/2010, 10:05 AM
why would you want any president of the country you live in to fail?

Uhmm, because I don't want gubment health care, I don't want his national id cards, I don't want his pardoning of illegal aliens, I don't want his idea of ultra gubment regulation, I don't want his cap and tax, I don't want his EPA CO2 health risk, I don't wnat his global warmng agenda. I could go on. So, yeah, I want him to fail in those aspects.

Keeping the country safe with a strong defense, great intelligence network, and great internet security to protect us from China, I want him to succeed.

OklahomaTuba
3/10/2010, 10:06 AM
Seems dear Leader has also doing a fantastic job of destroying the middle class by making the richer, richer, and the poorer, poorer.


The number of Americans who can call themselves millionaires has gone up in the past year, according to a report released Tuesday by Spectrem Group.

The number of U.S. households with a net worth of at least $1 million, not including primary residence, increased 16 percent to 7.8 million in 2009, according to the group's press release.

The number is up from 6.7 million in 2008. That follows a 27 percent decline in the millionaire population in 2008.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,588577,00.html?test=latestnews

Crucifax Autumn
3/10/2010, 10:13 AM
Lucky for us a million is the new thousand!

OklahomaTuba
3/10/2010, 10:20 AM
Lucky for us a million is the new thousand!And let's not forget Dear Leader's greatest accomplishment thus far, the gleaming new tent cities or "ObamaVilles" that are popping up all over the fruited plain.

http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/obamaville21.jpg

Crucifax Autumn
3/10/2010, 10:25 AM
Eh...We had those in Vegas for years now.

OklahomaTuba
3/10/2010, 10:30 AM
No wonder Obama hate's vegas then, they take credit for his only real accomplishment thus far.

Crucifax Autumn
3/10/2010, 10:31 AM
lol

Bourbon St Sooner
3/10/2010, 10:47 AM
- I still have a good job, unlike many affected by the Hope and Change, and I got an outrageous bonus on top if it.


You work for AIG?

OklahomaTuba
3/10/2010, 11:10 AM
You work for AIG?No, the gubment.

Oh wait, its all the same now, nm. ;)

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 01:27 PM
Well, I did get to trade in my clunker. It's highly appropriate that the government has decided to get into the car selling business.

PDXsooner
3/10/2010, 03:19 PM
wow, that sure is a lot to pin on someone who's been in office for barely over a year. very, very, very interesting way to look at the world. (by interesting i mean absolutely ridiculous).

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/10/2010, 03:47 PM
wow, that sure is a lot to pin on someone who's been in office for barely over a year. very, very, very interesting way to look at the world. (by interesting i mean absolutely ridiculous).You haven't really paid very close attention to our new pres., have you?

PDXsooner
3/10/2010, 03:59 PM
You haven't really paid very close attention to our new pres., have you?

sure, but what would i know? i mean, you're the expert, you're the only one that has access to the internet, editorials, op-ed pieces, books...oh wait...never mind.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 04:00 PM
wow, that sure is a lot to pin on someone who's been in office for barely over a year. very, very, very interesting way to look at the world. (by interesting i mean absolutely ridiculous).

When you try to rush in ill-thought social programs as fast as you can so that the opposition can't stop it, it doesn't take long to generate bad feelings.

TheHumanAlphabet
3/10/2010, 05:41 PM
When you try to rush in ill-thought social programs as fast as you can so that the opposition can't stop it, it doesn't take long to generate bad feelings.

Bingo!

If it is so good now, it will still be good after a year or so of discussion and understanding the ramifications. Not Rahm it thru.

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/10/2010, 05:50 PM
sure, but what would i know? i mean, you're the expert, you're the only one that has access to the internet, editorials, op-ed pieces, books...oh wait...never mind.What's he doing that's good, and why?haha

Chuck Bao
3/10/2010, 06:05 PM
Bingo!

If it is so good now, it will still be good after a year or so of discussion and understanding the ramifications. Not Rahm it thru.

I am not sure you guys are getting the severity of the economic situation. Almost every country in the world initiated stimulus measures over the last year and most of them were through huge deficit spending. All of that would have been wasted if the country with the largest consumer market in the world - the US - didn't follow suit. In reality, the alternative would have been global economic meltdown. Every privately-held bank everywhere would have failed, followed shortly by all private insurance companies and the recovery costs would have been far greater.

I am not saying that full health care reform needs to be enacted immediately. On the other hand, there are increasing number of Americans who are either losing their coverage or getting fleeced by rising premiums. As the situation further deteriorates, it just gets exponentially worse. So yeah, there is some urgency. Waiting on the politics in Washington and the typical blame game is dangerous.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 07:05 PM
I am not sure you guys are getting the severity of the economic situation. Almost every country in the world initiated stimulus measures over the last year and most of them were through huge deficit spending.

For a health care system to turn things around it has to be well-planned. There is no way in Hell that you can craft a high-quality health care system in the time they did. It is a shambles.

If you need 2,000 pages to describe it, something's wrong.

The Obama Adminstration pulled the same "rush it through" stunt in education, and now their plans are starting to generate a lot of backlash as people are now starting to see the problems.

Take your time and do it right. But that provides time to think it over, and they don't want that.

delhalew
3/10/2010, 07:07 PM
I am not sure you guys are getting the severity of the economic situation. Almost every country in the world initiated stimulus measures over the last year and most of them were through huge deficit spending. All of that would have been wasted if the country with the largest consumer market in the world - the US - didn't follow suit. In reality, the alternative would have been global economic meltdown. Every privately-held bank everywhere would have failed, followed shortly by all private insurance companies and the recovery costs would have been far greater.

I am not saying that full health care reform needs to be enacted immediately. On the other hand, there are increasing number of Americans who are either losing their coverage or getting fleeced by rising premiums. As the situation further deteriorates, it just gets exponentially worse. So yeah, there is some urgency. Waiting on the politics in Washington and the typical blame game is dangerous.

Forcing thru 2000 page entitlements is dangerous Chuck. In this country we have a history of not being able to control these things after we create them. Its hard to tell entire generations of ambitionless freeloaders that they have a responsibilty for their own welfare.
Bailouts and stimulus? When you treat a bubble economy like the salad days will never end, you deserve to learn a hard lesson. There are better ways to stimulate an economy than hanging a banner indicating someday something will be built here. Did those turtles ever get their tunnel?
Just to remind everyone, I am a conservative, which means that I am an evil, racist, homephobe who swerves to run over puppies and wants to kill all of you...with my mind powers.

Fraggle145
3/10/2010, 07:13 PM
For a health care system to turn things around it has to be well-planned. There is no way in Hell that you can craft a high-quality health care system in the time they did. It is a shambles.

If you need 2,000 pages to describe it, something's wrong.

The Obama Adminstration pulled the same "rush it through" stunt in education, and now their plans are starting to generate a lot of backlash as people are now starting to see the problems.

Take your time and do it right. But that provides time to think it over, and they don't want that.

I dont see any evidence of anything being rushed through... Didnt someone earlier in the thread point out how he wasted a super majority in the senate by not getting anything finished? :confused:

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 07:14 PM
How many of those in favor of the health care legislation have read it? How many have read 10% of it?

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 07:16 PM
I dont see any evidence of anything being rushed through...

Gee, where have you been? Remember the "We must get this passed by Christmas" goal? They just weren't able to do it.

And remember that states are being forced to adopt standards even before they have been released. How is that not rushing it through?

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/10/2010, 07:26 PM
I dont see any evidence of anything being rushed through... Didnt someone earlier in the thread point out how he wasted a super majority in the senate by not getting anything finished? :confused:Pretty silly!

Chuck Bao
3/10/2010, 07:42 PM
Seriously dude?!!??? Are you admitting to the fact that there are serious problems with the current system. You can moan and bitch about the government/state taking your hard earned dollars and you are not seeing that the insurance industry is doing their job on you as well?
.
Basically, it is like this. I have a great job and I have employer provided insurance, but the terms have changed so much that I am paying out of pocket for health care costs but I am saving back on using the company plan in case I get really sick and have to stay in the hospital. There is an annual claim clause in effect, as I understand it. I can only imagine how those with children must think - i.e., I'm only doing it for the kids, even though I am the only breadwinner.

Does that make sense? If I am wrong, please shoot me down.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 07:42 PM
It's amazing that NCLB, which both Dems and Repubs supported, is now seen as an evil, horrible Act that is ruining our education system. Yet, the healthcare reform legislation, which does not have bipartisan support or even support from the people, is somehow a good thing.

We never learn our lessons.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 07:46 PM
Seriously dude?!!??? Are you admitting to the fact that there are serious problems with the current system. You can moan and bitch about the government/state taking your hard earned dollars and you are not seeing that the insurance industry is doing their job on you as well?

Does that mean that any legislation that attempts to correct the situation is good legislation?

We had problems with our education system. The NCLB tried to rectify that. Does that make NCLB good legislation?

This is the problem with us-versus-them caste-warfare that Dems love to play. Rather than sell the merits of your plan, sell the evils of the problem. (This is kinda' how we got suckered into Viet Nam.)

Chuck Bao
3/10/2010, 07:57 PM
No it doesn't . But, you are not going to get anything of importance if you are thinking that everything is perfect and all lovely.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 08:05 PM
Everything is not perfect nor lovely. Now what? Go along with everything Obama wants?

For good health care legislation to pass, we need to determine what the country really wants and what the government can reasonably accomplish. There are also needs to be a discussion about the proper role of the government. That takes time and a lot of dialog.

They didn't do that. Instead, they formulated their own image of what they wanted and tried to ram it through. Rather than listening to the people, they tried to convince the people.

Now, they are trying to bandage the original legislation to appease its critics. Once that starts happening, good legislation is not going to be forthcoming.

I think most of its supporters really only want it to notch a political victory.

Okla-homey
3/10/2010, 08:32 PM
i just wanted to throw out a kudos to president obama. i think he's doing a decent job so far. with the situation he inherited it's been an extremely tough job, but he's holding his own. not perfect, but i'm excited about him as he moves into the next three and most likely 7 years...

You can't possibly be serious. Right?

delhalew
3/10/2010, 09:58 PM
No it doesn't . But, you are not going to get anything of importance if you are thinking that everything is perfect and all lovely.

Did I miss the part were anybody said we should do nothing?

StoopTroup
3/10/2010, 10:13 PM
I think he's also done a great job as well in my opinion:

- He's single handedly brought the GOP back to life



If life is having your entire guts cut out with a machete via an Election then watching them replace a Kennedy with a Pornstar with a truck while more and more "Christian Values Guys" come out of the closet is bringing them back to life....

The Libertarians will come in 2nd in 2012 and Obama will get a 2nd term.

JohnnyMack
3/10/2010, 10:44 PM
I can't completely trash what BHO has done so far. His handling of the economy at the onset of his term with TARP 2 and the additional bailouts wasn't a shock. Especially considering what we saw with W and TARP 1. Dismiss what Obama did with the bailouts if you will, but something had to be done. I also applaud his handling of Iraq. While I opposed the invasion from the onset, the manner he chose to withdraw the troops made sense, to me at least. I'm not a fan at all of nation building, so I don't agree with the push into Afghanistan as I think it's ultimately a fools' errand.

Where Obama has really lost me is with his handling of and focus on health care reform instead of the economy. While he would, and often does, argue that his fix of health care would spur the economy on, I ain't buying it. I still contend he took his popularity and the majority he had in Congress and saw it as an opportunity to quickly push his plan through. I honestly think he expected this thing to have been put to bed many months ago and probably still can't quite understand where it all went wrong. Now he's hung himself out to dry and has left himself with very little wiggle room.

If Obama had focused on jobs, jobs, jobs (and costs, costs, costs as Mr. Warren Buffet said) I think he'd be cruising towards a second term and would have the populuar support and political clout to start working on reforming health care. As it is there's a very large set of storm clouds brewing on his political horizon. The November elections will plummet this country into gridlock. Regardless of who ends up with control of the House or the Senate, once we get to 2011 we're going to have a do-nothing Congress combined with a weak economy that should lead to plenty of time for Barack to work on his jump shot.

I don't think Obama ever figured out how to transition from being "the campaigner" to being "the decider". He's still working way too hard at selling his brand and hasn't seemed to surround himself with people who understand how to get things done in DC. Obama should jettison Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod and try and distance himself from his campaign-style image that still hangs over him. It would also do a lot to shake loose from his "Chicago Style Politics" image that is being used effectively against him. I watched a good interview (done by Fareed Zakaria) with former Secretray of State (and WH Chief of Staff to RR) James Baker in which Mr. Baker talked about Reagan being effective because he understood how to govern from the center. Obama never seemed to care about trying that tactic and it seems like it's costing him dearly.

OULenexaman
3/10/2010, 10:46 PM
This is one funny thread.....

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 10:46 PM
The Libertarians will come in 2nd in 2012 and Obama will get a 2nd term.

That is actually a serious concern. Of course, if the Libertarians come in second, they will teach those Dems a lesson about government takeover of private industries. Having to spend another four years in power will really shake 'em up.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 10:47 PM
Where Obama has really lost me is with his handling of and focus on health care reform instead of the economy.

Yep. There is a huge difference between trying to fix the economy and using the economy to push through your own agenda.

OULenexaman
3/10/2010, 10:50 PM
and the Lizard hits the nail on the head...

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 10:51 PM
You forgot the "As usual..." part.

SCOUT
3/10/2010, 10:51 PM
I can't completely trash what BHO has done so far. His handling of the economy at the onset of his term with TARP 2 and the additional bailouts wasn't a shock. Especially considering what we saw with W and TARP 1. Dismiss what Obama did with the bailouts if you will, but something had to be done. I also applaud his handling of Iraq. While I opposed the invasion from the onset, the manner he chose to withdraw the troops made sense, to me at least. I'm not a fan at all of nation building, so I don't agree with the push into Afghanistan as I think it's ultimately a fools' errand.

Where Obama has really lost me is with his handling of and focus on health care reform instead of the economy. While he would, and often does, argue that his fix of health care would spur the economy on, I ain't buying it. I still contend he took his popularity and the majority he had in Congress and saw it as an opportunity to quickly push his plan through. I honestly think he expected this thing to have been put to bed many months ago and probably still can't quite understand where it all went wrong. Now he's hung himself out to dry and has left himself with very little wiggle room.

If Obama had focused on jobs, jobs, jobs (and costs, costs, costs as Mr. Warren Buffet said) I think he'd be cruising towards a second term and would have the populuar support and political clout to start working on reforming health care. As it is there's a very large set of storm clouds brewing on his political horizon. The November elections will plummet this country into gridlock. Regardless of who ends up with control of the House or the Senate, once we get to 2011 we're going to have a do-nothing Congress combined with a weak economy that should lead to plenty of time for Barack to work on his jump shot.

I don't think Obama ever figured out how to transition from being "the campaigner" to being "the decider". He's still working way too hard at selling his brand and hasn't seemed to surround himself with people who understand how to get things done in DC. Obama should jettison Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod and try and distance himself from his campaign-style image that still hangs over him. It would also do a lot to shake loose from his "Chicago Style Politics" image that is being used effectively against him. I watched a good interview (done by Fareed Zakaria) with former Secretray of State (and WH Chief of Staff to RR) James Baker in which Mr. Baker talked about Reagan being effective because he understood how to govern from the center. Obama never seemed to care about trying that tactic and it seems like it's costing him dearly.
I am not in complete agreement with your assessment of the middle east, I don't completely disagree with it either though. Outside of that...

Me too.

delhalew
3/10/2010, 10:53 PM
I can't completely trash what BHO has done so far. His handling of the economy at the onset of his term with TARP 2 and the additional bailouts wasn't a shock. Especially considering what we saw with W and TARP 1. Dismiss what Obama did with the bailouts if you will, but something had to be done. I also applaud his handling of Iraq. While I opposed the invasion from the onset, the manner he chose to withdraw the troops made sense, to me at least. I'm not a fan at all of nation building, so I don't agree with the push into Afghanistan as I think it's ultimately a fools' errand.

Where Obama has really lost me is with his handling of and focus on health care reform instead of the economy. While he would, and often does, argue that his fix of health care would spur the economy on, I ain't buying it. I still contend he took his popularity and the majority he had in Congress and saw it as an opportunity to quickly push his plan through. I honestly think he expected this thing to have been put to bed many months ago and probably still can't quite understand where it all went wrong. Now he's hung himself out to dry and has left himself with very little wiggle room.

If Obama had focused on jobs, jobs, jobs (and costs, costs, costs as Mr. Warren Buffet said) I think he'd be cruising towards a second term and would have the populuar support and political clout to start working on reforming health care. As it is there's a very large set of storm clouds brewing on his political horizon. The November elections will plummet this country into gridlock. Regardless of who ends up with control of the House or the Senate, once we get to 2011 we're going to have a do-nothing Congress combined with a weak economy that should lead to plenty of time for Barack to work on his jump shot.

I don't think Obama ever figured out how to transition from being "the campaigner" to being "the decider". He's still working way too hard at selling his brand and hasn't seemed to surround himself with people who understand how to get things done in DC. Obama should jettison Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod and try and distance himself from his campaign-style image that still hangs over him. It would also do a lot to shake loose from his "Chicago Style Politics" image that is being used effectively against him. I watched a good interview (done by Fareed Zakaria) with former Secretray of State (and WH Chief of Staff to RR) James Baker in which Mr. Baker talked about Reagan being effective because he understood how to govern from the center. Obama never seemed to care about trying that tactic and it seems like it's costing him dearly.

Overall, pretty astute analysis. Though, I would go further and say the reason he can't govern from the center is because he is an arrogent ideologue.

Leroy Lizard
3/10/2010, 10:57 PM
Overall, pretty astute analysis. Though, I would go further and say the reason he can't govern from the center is because he is a sneaky, underhanded, arrogant ideologue.

Fixed.

PDXsooner
3/10/2010, 11:50 PM
i don't see why the libertarians would pull from the republican party. what on earth do the two have in common? libertarians believe in state's rights and people being able to live how they choose. republicans want to take away state's rights and tri-fold 300 million bibles and jam them up every american's ***...

delhalew
3/10/2010, 11:58 PM
That's ****tarded.

SCOUT
3/11/2010, 12:10 AM
i don't see why the libertarians would pull from the republican party. what on earth do the two have in common? libertarians believe in state's rights and people being able to live how they choose. republicans want to take away state's rights and tri-fold 300 million bibles and jam them up every american's ***...

I remember getting the GOP brochure during the last election saying that I should do my part. If I just shoved 50 bibles up other American asses, the world would be a better place. In hindsight, I wish I had done more.

Get it...hindsight...I am here all week.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 12:14 AM
make no mistake, i draw a CLEAR and DISTINCTIVE line between the political party known as the republican party and the traditional conservative ideology. clearly, the two are completely unrelated and have almost nothing to do with each other, contrary to common perception.

SCOUT
3/11/2010, 12:32 AM
make no mistake, i draw a CLEAR and DISTINCTIVE line between the political party known as the republican party and the traditional conservative ideology. clearly, the two are completely unrelated and have almost nothing to do with each other, contrary to common perception.

Umm...OK. But you said the Republican party. You do know that the Republican party is referred as the Grand Old Party, AKA GOP. Right?

If you want to discuss conservative vs. republican that is another topic.

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/11/2010, 12:46 AM
This is one DEPRESSING thread.....fixed, ugh!

Crucifax Autumn
3/11/2010, 12:48 AM
That's SicEm's schtick anyway.

Leroy Lizard
3/11/2010, 12:52 AM
libertarians believe in state's rights and people being able to live how they choose.

Those two ideals are often mutually exclusive.


republicans want to take away state's rights and tri-fold 300 million bibles and jam them up every american's ***...

Republicans want to take away state's rights? No, not even close.

Sure, they may support SOME legislation that gives more power to the Feds, but by and large Republicans are states rightists. Certainly more than Democrats.

Fraggle145
3/11/2010, 03:31 AM
Gee, where have you been? Remember the "We must get this passed by Christmas" goal? They just weren't able to do it.

And remember that states are being forced to adopt standards even before they have been released. How is that not rushing it through?

Right... And it still isnt finished so i am still failing to see how this was rushed through.

I agree with a lot of what JM has written.

Leroy Lizard
3/11/2010, 03:53 AM
Right... And it still isnt finished so i am still failing to see how this was rushed through.

They've been rushing through the development of the standards, but they just haven't been able to finish them. Obama originally pushed for a February deadline but they just couldn't get the job done. Under normal circumstances, states wouldn't be asked to adopt them until they were officially released, but Obama wants the adoption process to proceed as fast as possible. So states are being forced to adopt the standards anyway.

How can that not be considered rushing things through? The situation is so bad that states are going to host public forums on the standards AFTER choosing to adopt them. You see, if the public is allowed to see them before the adoption, they might object and slow things down or (gasp!) decide for themselves they don't want them. Can't have that. Just like with health care, this administration doesn't care what the people want. ****, it doesn't even want to hear from the public.

Crucifax Autumn
3/11/2010, 04:08 AM
As long as the Republic can remain intact:

http://www.howardhallis.com/starwars/food/kudos.jpg

TheHumanAlphabet
3/11/2010, 10:23 AM
I am not saying that full health care reform needs to be enacted immediately. On the other hand, there are increasing number of Americans who are either losing their coverage or getting fleeced by rising premiums. As the situation further deteriorates, it just gets exponentially worse. So yeah, there is some urgency. Waiting on the politics in Washington and the typical blame game is dangerous.

Then fix or adjust the insurance laws. Include tort reform to reduce the number of unneeded tests and protect the doctors from the likes of John Edwards who sued every OB-GYN for everything under the sun. Require EVERYONE to have insurance and buy it at work or through coops. If they "can't afford" the coverage, then strengthen FSAs or provide a tax break to help afford the coverage. None of these ideas requires a government take over of 7% of our economy and builds a nation dependent on the government teat.

C&CDean
3/11/2010, 10:43 AM
make no mistake, i draw a CLEAR and DISTINCTIVE line between the political party known as the republican party and the traditional conservative ideology. clearly, the two are completely unrelated and have almost nothing to do with each other, contrary to common perception.

Please. WTF do you know about conservatism and/or republicans? You view things from a perspective so skewed by beached whale humping tree poning outta-the-closet homo loving global warming alarmist gun hating baby killing convicted murderer coddling foolish views your opinion on anything conservative is null and void.

delhalew
3/11/2010, 10:44 AM
Then fix or adjust the insurance laws. Include tort reform to reduce the number of unneeded tests and protect the doctors from the likes of John Edwards who sued every OB-GYN for everything under the sun. Require EVERYONE to have insurance and buy it at work or through coops. If they "can't afford" the coverage, then strengthen FSAs or provide a tax break to help afford the coverage. None of these ideas requires a government take over of 7% of our economy and builds a nation dependent on the government teat.

The only red flag in there is a mandate that everyone purchase insurance. I understand why you say that, but pretax medical savings accounts will get more people in the market without gubment overstepping its boundries.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 10:54 AM
Please. WTF do you know about conservatism and/or republicans? You view things from a perspective so skewed by beached whale humping tree poning outta-the-closet homo loving global warming alarmist gun hating baby killing convicted murderer coddling foolish views your opinion on anything conservative is null and void.

Oh contrar. ha ha, you know nothing of me. or much else for that matter. your mind's been closed since some time back in the 80's...

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 11:07 AM
on another note, consider this: right now, you could wrap ghandi, the dali lama and jesus into one man, plug them into the presidency, and they would fail by many accounts. they would fail in that every member of the opposing party would call them failures.

so connsidering the fact that obama is hamstrung by the democratic party, and knowing that regardless of what he did or does a decent size chunk of people will call him a failure, he's doing a stand-up solid job.

god bless president obama.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:13 AM
I watched a good interview (done by Fareed Zakaria) with former Secretray of State (and WH Chief of Staff to RR) James Baker in which Mr. Baker talked about Reagan being effective because he understood how to govern from the center. Obama never seemed to care about trying that tactic and it seems like it's costing him dearly.

What was Baker talking about? Did he give examples? I was too young during Reagan to know if and how he governed from the center.

When I hear Obama speak, I get the impression that he wants to govern from the center but he clearly hasn't figured out how to...or, at least, hasn't been able to convince Congress to join him.

delhalew thinks he hasn't been able to because he's an arrogant ideologue and perhaps his overconfidence in his ability to inspire lawmakers (as opposed to his base) has been one of his weaknesses. I prefer that weakness to the ones I saw in our previous leader, but it doesn't make it any less debilitating.

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:18 AM
so connsidering the fact that obama is hamstrung by the democratic party, and knowing that regardless of what he did or does a decent size chunk of people will call him a failure, he's doing a stand-up solid job.So what your saying is Dear Leader didn't have a big enough majority to institute his radical socialist agenda, therefore he is a failure?

The reason he is hamstrung is his agenda is crap, America doesn't want it, and will end up giving the GOP the congress in Nov because of it.

Sounds like you wish he was some Marxist dictator that could do what he wants regardless of how much people despise his radical agenda.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 11:25 AM
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

i agree!!

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:25 AM
When I hear Obama speak, I get the impression that he wants to govern from the center but he clearly hasn't figured out how to...

Please.

Was nationalizing GM "centrist"?

Is nationalizing 1/6th of the economy "centrist". No way.

He's an left-wing extremist.

He's cares nothing about being a centrist, only trying to fool us into thinking he is one by calling his socialist agenda "centrist".

That's what he is, and that's why he & his agenda are going down in flames so badly.

And that's why conservatism is now surging again.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:26 AM
The reason he is hamstrung is his agenda is crap, America doesn't want it, and will end up giving the GOP the congress in Nov because of it.

And then the GOP will give America what it doesn't want (just like last time) and America will end up giving the Dems the congress later on. And you'll continue to ignore the fact that the GOP is doing the EXACT SAME THING the Dems are doing, just with different words.

Rinse. Repeat.

delhalew
3/11/2010, 11:27 AM
So what your saying is Dear Leader didn't have a big enough majority to institute his radical socialist agenda, therefore he is a failure?

Sounds like you wish he was some Marxist dictator that could do what he wants regardless of how much people despise his radical agenda.

Folks are getting there wish. All his speech in St Louis yesterday needed was the Imperial March in the background. He has had it with political process. He doesn't care what we think. He doesn't even want to hear from his liberal base. Why?

He knows what this bill will REALLY acomplish. Its about feeding the recipient class and new taxes to be rolled out later in addition to the ones included in the bill. He wants a center right populace to be governed by a leftist regime that can perpetuate itself. He fancies himself the last word on every issue. You are all to damn stupid to do anything about it. You'll take it and you'll like it.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:28 AM
Please.

Was nationalizing GM "centrist"?

Is nationalizing 1/6th of the economy "centrist". No way.

So he's only governing from the center if EVERYTHING he does is centrist? Is that how Reagan governed?

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:28 AM
i agree!!You do have to agree that saying Obama was "hamstrug" with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate was pretty f'king stupid.

He wasn't hamstrung signing the most expensive failure in American history into law.

At this rate, porkulus may end up being the only accomplishment of his disastrous Presidency.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:30 AM
He fancies himself the last word on every issue. You are all to damn stupid to do anything about it. You'll take it and you'll like it.

Kinda like Bush. Only his thing was "you all are too damn smart to understand it."

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:31 AM
And then the GOP will give America what it doesn't want (just like last time)Sorry, but I don't recall the GOP trying to bribe and Rahm anything close to what the donks are doing now with zerocare.

soonerscuba
3/11/2010, 11:32 AM
None of these ideas requires a government take over of 7%While I would hardly call subsidy of private enterprise a takeover, I laud your ability to parse a talking point and get a figure that reflects current private healthcare spending. Thanks, and kudos.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:32 AM
Sorry, but I don't recall the GOP trying to bribe and Rahm anything close to what the donks are doing now with zerocare.

So you're claiming that the GOP was giving America what it wanted, but America decided to vote them out of power anyway?

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:33 AM
So he's only governing from the center if EVERYTHING he does is centrist?Again, what major issue has he pushed that is??

The only time he does go centrist is when he is forces to flip flop from his original positions because they are so stupid to begin with.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 11:35 AM
And then the GOP will give America what it doesn't want (just like last time) and America will end up giving the Dems the congress later on. And you'll continue to ignore the fact that the GOP is doing the EXACT SAME THING the Dems are doing, just with different words.

Rinse. Repeat.

^^^^^^^
this guy gets it!

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:35 AM
Again, what major issue has he pushed that is??

The only time he does go centrist is when he is forces to flip flop from his original positions because they are so stupid to begin with.

Your first statement implies that you think he has never gone centrist.

Your second statement implies that you think he has.

Which is it?

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:35 AM
So you're claiming that the GOP was giving America what it wanted, but America decided to vote them out of power anyway?Looks like your reading comprehension is off today.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 11:36 AM
i've got two kudos bars here...one to topdawg and another one to Obama!!

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:37 AM
Your first statement implies that you think he has never gone centrist.

Your second statement implies that you think he has.

Which is it?I think my posts are clear enough for most people to understand.

You say he wants to be a centrist, but initially proposes things that are radical far-left wet dreams. Only when people figure out what he is up to does he have to back off.

How is that wanting to be a centrist, if you do it only because you are forced too???

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:39 AM
Looks like your reading comprehension is off today.

You said that the Dems would be voted out of power because they're not giving America what America wants.

I said that if that's the case, then you must assume that the GOP wasn't giving America what it wanted which is why they voted them out of power and suggested that the pattern would probably continue because both parties are doing the same thing with different words.

Then you said


Sorry, but I don't recall the GOP trying to bribe and Rahm anything close to what the donks are doing now with zerocare.

which seemed totally unrelated to what I said, so I asked if you were trying to refute my claim. Were you trying to refute my claim or were you trying to change the subject?

delhalew
3/11/2010, 11:42 AM
You won't get me to defend Bush. Until the GOP proves otherwise, they are a joke. Senator Graham from Georgia wants a national biometric I'd card. Its for our own good. Never mind controlling our boarders. This is the kind of thing that future politicians exploit in their own way.
Deceptacons and Chairman Maobama are one in the same.

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:44 AM
Were you trying to refute my claim or were you trying to change the subject?Not at all trying to change the subject, just pointing out that the GOP had never tried to push something so huge and unpopular like this, or by using some very corrupt means such as bribery, etc. Nearest thing I can think of was trying to reform SS and immigration reform, which where never rahmed thur like Zerocare is being done.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:49 AM
I think my posts are clear enough for most people to understand.

You say he wants to be a centrist, but initially proposes things that are radical far-left wet dreams. Only when people figure out what he is up to does he have to back off.

How is that wanting to be a centrist, if you do it only because you are forced too???

I said I think he wants to govern from the center. It was in response to what someone else said about Reagan.

So, if you think that this


Was nationalizing GM "centrist"?

Is nationalizing 1/6th of the economy "centrist". No way.

is a reasonable response to my claim that I think Obama wants to govern from the center, then I suppose you would have similar issues with someone saying Reagan governed from the center because, surely, two things he did could be considered very conservative.

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:53 AM
BTW, speaking of corruption in order to take over 1/6th of the entire economy, seems the donks now what to trash the constitution in order to force ZeroCare on us...


Would House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her fellow House Democratic leaders try to cram the Senate version of Obamacare through the House without actually having a recorded vote on the bill?
Not only is the answer yes, they would, they have figured out a way to do it, according to National Journal's Congress Daily
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/House-Democrats-looking-at-Slaughter-Solution-to-pass-Obamacare-without-a-vote-on-Senate-bill-87267402.html#ixzz0ht6cgaL2

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 11:56 AM
Not at all trying to change the subject, just pointing out that the GOP had never tried to push something so huge and unpopular like this, or by using some very corrupt means such as bribery, etc. Nearest thing I can think of was trying to reform SS and immigration reform, which where never rahmed thur like Zerocare is being done.

But that's besides the point. They clearly pushed enough unpopular (or unsuccessful) stuff through to get voted out of power. Right? Maybe it wasn't anything big, maybe just a lot of small things. Or maybe they tried (unsuccessfully) on enough big things that they got voted out of power. Whatever the case, they didn't give America what America wanted (or they gave America something it didn't want).

I think your premise is not far off...there's a good chance that the Dems could give American something it doesn't want and get voted out of power. I just wanted to point out that the GOP is guilty of the same kind of behavior.

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 11:57 AM
I said I think he wants to govern from the center. It was in response to what someone else said about Reagan.


Ok, but again that's not reality because nearly every position he has started with is from a radical far-left position. Its only after the blowback from his original stupid positions does he head towards the center.

That's not wanting to govern from the center, that being forced to do it. You realize the difference , right??

OklahomaTuba
3/11/2010, 12:00 PM
They clearly pushed enough unpopular (or unsuccessful) stuff through to get voted out of power. Right? Maybe it wasn't anything big, maybe just a lot of small things.Sure, not disagreeing with that at all. Medicare part D comes to mind.

Only difference is the scope and size. Kinda like comparing Bush's spending to Obama's. It only took Obama 14 months to spend what Bush did in 8 years.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 12:01 PM
I just wanted to point out that the GOP is guilty of the same kind of behavior.

bingo, which is what makes a guy like tuba a dime a dozen. pointing out all the weaknesses of our current administration? easy. criticizing whomever is in office is old hat. the pendulum will swing back in favor of the republicans at some point and they'll wield more power...and then the result is that we'll all lose.

if obama can't get the two parties to cooperate, no one can. i don't think there's a soul out there at this point that could get the two to make progress. it's sad.

SoonerProphet
3/11/2010, 12:02 PM
Ok, but again that's not reality because nearly every position he has started with is from a radical far-left position. Its only after the blowback from his original stupid positions does he head towards the center.

That's not wanting to govern from the center, that being forced to do it. You realize the difference , right??

So a surge in Afghanistan, his Patriot Act renewal, his recored setting defense budget. In your estimation are these not center minded policies?

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 12:02 PM
Sure, not disagreeing with that at all. Medicare part D comes to mind.

Only difference is the scope and size. Kinda like comparing Bush's spending to Obama's. It only took Obama 14 months to spend what Bush did in 8 years.

does that include bush's bailout plan?

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 12:03 PM
So a surge in Afghanistan, his Patriot Act renewal, his recored setting defense budget. In your estimation are these not center minded policies?

let's see if tuba addresses, deflects, or ignores this post.

soonerscuba
3/11/2010, 12:07 PM
You guys realize you are wasting your time, right? In Tuba's world, Republicans are good and Democrats are bad, and there isn't a nuance or fact that's going to change his mind. I would just focus on talking to the people that have something fresh or interesting to say.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 12:13 PM
You guys realize you are wasting your time, right? In Tuba's world, Republicans are good and Democrats are bad, and there isn't a nuance or fact that's going to change his mind. I would just focus on talking to the people that have something fresh or interesting to say.

truer words have never been spoken

delhalew
3/11/2010, 12:25 PM
bingo, which is what makes a guy like tuba a dime a dozen. pointing out all the weaknesses of our current administration? easy. criticizing whomever is in office is old hat. the pendulum will swing back in favor of the republicans at some point and they'll wield more power...and then the result is that we'll all lose.

if obama can't get the two parties to cooperate, no one can. i don't think there's a soul out there at this point that could get the two to make progress. it's sad.

If they were start over now and actually hammer out some bipartisan ideas, they could get a good bill. They won't do that because said bill would not grow gubment enough and wouldn't line the pockets and war chests of the right people.

SoonerProphet
3/11/2010, 12:34 PM
If they were start over now and actually hammer out some bipartisan ideas, they could get a good bill. They won't do that because said bill would not grow gubment enough and wouldn't line the pockets and war chests of the right people.

Who is "they", cause I hope you are not under the delusion that one group shies away from growing government, lining the pockets, and fattening the warchests, of the "right people" more than the other.

Fraggle145
3/11/2010, 12:49 PM
I think my posts are clear enough for most people to understand.

Comedy Gold.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/j0qm0KUPeD8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j0qm0KUPeD8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 01:10 PM
Ok, but again that's not reality because nearly every position he has started with is from a radical far-left position. Its only after the blowback from his original stupid positions does he head towards the center.

That's not wanting to govern from the center, that being forced to do it. You realize the difference , right??

SoonerProphet asked the appropriate follow-up question so I'll wait for your response.

olevetonahill
3/11/2010, 01:17 PM
Like all Political threads this one has devolved into another
http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/28446425/Circle+Jerk+2009+CircleJerkforWeb.jpg

delhalew
3/11/2010, 01:29 PM
Who is "they", cause I hope you are not under the delusion that one group shies away from growing government, lining the pockets, and fattening the warchests, of the "right people" more than the other.

Stop banging your head against a wall. Who is in power NOW?
Step outside party bickering.

Jello Biafra
3/11/2010, 01:30 PM
in before the lock...

SoonerProphet
3/11/2010, 01:41 PM
Stop banging your head against a wall. Who is in power NOW?
Step outside party bickering.

Wait...what? Party bickering? Who gives a sh*t who is in power NOW11!!!!

Again, do you seriously think that one party holds a monoply on growing government, fattening warchests, and lining supporters pockets?

JohnnyMack
3/11/2010, 02:09 PM
So a surge in Afghanistan, his Patriot Act renewal, his recored setting defense budget. In your estimation are these not center minded policies?

Since he's not likely to give you anything approaching a rational response, might I say that I think many of Obama's policies have in fact been moderate in nature. I do think that his health care proposal sucks a giant donkey pecker, but that's just my personal opinion. I don't think the plan that was rolled out initially (which has since been turned into a gigantic orgy of greed, lies and ****) was anywhere near centrist in nature. The fact that he's unable get even his own party to vote for this thing and that he is actually out on the road stumping it more than a year after it was initially proposed is a testament to how far left of center the proposal was.

TheHumanAlphabet
3/11/2010, 02:10 PM
The only red flag in there is a mandate that everyone purchase insurance. I understand why you say that, but pretax medical savings accounts will get more people in the market without gubment overstepping its boundries.

I'd go for that. But I do think people should be held accountable for the lottery they are taking by not having health insurance. Most people who "self-insure" other items, have the money to handle the loss. This is probably not the case when people are forgoing health insurance.

TheHumanAlphabet
3/11/2010, 02:13 PM
Anyone talking about the increased taxes with this??? The back door tax of applying 2.9% tax on ALL investment income. You will be paying this every year and on all your investments. You cannot get around it. A BACKDOOR TAX. More tax and tax from Obammy.

tommieharris91
3/11/2010, 02:22 PM
Like all Political threads this one has devolved into another
http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/28446425/Circle+Jerk+2009+CircleJerkforWeb.jpg

Who woulda thunk that this thread was going to be divided along partisan lines? :rolleyes:

delhalew
3/11/2010, 02:41 PM
Who woulda thunk that this thread was going to be divided along partisan lines? :rolleyes:
I keep trying to steer it away from that, but its the nature of these things.
When they all met at the Blair House the pubs sent their A team and talked about the ideas that the pres has been ignoring for a year. The dems might have some good ideas buried in that mess(who can tell). If republicans want to fight gubment growth, that's great. Let's remember that dems have been the ones stopping this. Republicans have been powerless.

I would like for both parties to learn from the awakening of the American people in the last two administrations. If republicans would walk the walk, they would be closer to my political position. Dems don't want to acknowledge that gov and our debt are way out of control.
In any case, I am in a position of being made to feel like a radical because I hold dear our founding ideals of federalism.
For crying out loud, I was a registered (D) before I changed to (I) ten years ago.

TopDawg
3/11/2010, 03:53 PM
Since he's not likely to give you anything approaching a rational response, might I say that I think many of Obama's policies have in fact been moderate in nature. I do think that his health care proposal sucks a giant donkey pecker, but that's just my personal opinion. I don't think the plan that was rolled out initially (which has since been turned into a gigantic orgy of greed, lies and ****) was anywhere near centrist in nature. The fact that he's unable get even his own party to vote for this thing and that he is actually out on the road stumping it more than a year after it was initially proposed is a testament to how far left of center the proposal was.

I'm with ya on that first part. To be honest, I've only peripherally followed the events of this health care plan. Was the original plan Obama's or did the Congressional Dems come up with it at his urging? I thought they already had a health care plan in the works before he took office. And he's not still stumping for the original plan, is he? Hasn't this plan been through several revisions?

TheHumanAlphabet
3/11/2010, 04:00 PM
Obammy has not put a plan out there with his name on it. Because he doesn't want to get "pidgeon-holed" into anything. So he let Congress work up a plan and you have extremists in one house trying to work with people who are reconcilliators in the other house and you end up with a klugged up mess that no one likes...

olevetonahill
3/11/2010, 04:02 PM
Who woulda thunk that this thread was going to be divided along partisan lines? :rolleyes:

:D :D :D :D ;)

Crucifax Autumn
3/11/2010, 04:13 PM
A perfectly good visual kudos joke gone to waste thanks to you guys all lined up yelling across the fence I'm sitting on!

Bourbon St Sooner
3/11/2010, 05:08 PM
When I first saw the title of this thread I gave the over/under for # of pages at 6, mostly because I figured it would get locked by then. Can this thread make it to 10 pages before LL/LAS/Tuba get it locked?

Crucifax Autumn
3/11/2010, 05:09 PM
It can if we go of on enough non-arguable tangents!

Crucifax Autumn
3/11/2010, 05:10 PM
Who woulda thunk that this thread was going to be divided along partisan lines? :rolleyes:

We shoulda divided it along a chorus line instead.

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 06:06 PM
this thread went just as planned - kudos to me!

delhalew
3/11/2010, 06:33 PM
A perfectly good visual kudos joke gone to waste thanks to you guys all lined up yelling across the fence I'm sitting on!

Thanks to that I got a good giggle envisioning Barrack the Sith Lord.

EnragedOUfan
3/11/2010, 07:10 PM
I'm about to get negged but I also could care less. I have both Democratic views and some conservative views. Here's my opinon on politics

Global Warming: Some people say its happening, some says its a hoax. Who knows..... However, no can deny the increased levels of carbon dioxide because it is true. Not to mention, the burning of fossil fuels and exhaust/emissions from automobiles surely can't be good for the atmosphere not to mention the planet as a whole. Not to mention, the earth is over the 6 Billion marker in population which means the rapid rate of pollution will continue....... Will any of this affect us in our lifetime? Probably not. But in my daughter's lifetime? Its hard to say.

Abortion: I'm totally against the destruction of life. Any woman who wants to kill her child because she's too young or whatever should be denied that right. However, if my wife/daughter were to be raped, I might change my thought process. If the pregnancy could put my family members at risk, then I'm all for sacrificing the embryo. I think doctors should have the final say so. Sorry.

Constitution lovers: I'm all about the constitution. It makes America what it is today. It created America. However, people who try to use the argument against the Democrats about the Constitution need to consider taking a politics class or something. Because if they do, they'll realize that over the course of American history, the original constitution has been changed!!!! That's right, women being able to vote and African Americans being able to vote WERE NOT part of the original constitution. Not to mention, laws have changed. So people really need to lay off of the whole constitution argument.

Health Care: Maybe some people don't realize it, but Insurance companies are robbing folks. Not only are they robbing folks and making unreal profits, they will quickly drop a person who has some type of extensive cancer in a heartbeat. It happens. Not to mention, my step father is an Independent contractor. I hear from him that Insurance rates are outrageous. So do I think that some type of health care reform is a bad idea? Hell no I don't.

Democrats: America's new public enemy. However, just remember that if it wasn't for the Democrats, there wouldn't be an MGIB for military. Nor would there be anytype of Medicaid/Medicare for our elderly and poor. When it comes to poor, everyone should get off their aces and work. But how our government treats our elderly is ****ing disgrace. Sorry Republicans.

The wars: I'm against the wars, but there's no point in turning back now. However, the wars are the sole reason as to why our economy is ****. Contractors charge the government outrageous prices not to mention the daily cost to fund the war and fuel and the Bush Administrations policy of allowing the banks to do as they will without any type of regulation....

Rush Limbaugh: A disgrace..

PDXsooner
3/11/2010, 07:14 PM
I'm about to get negged but I also could care less. I have both Democratic views and some conservative views. Here's my opinon on politics

Global Warming: Some people say its happening, some says its a hoax. Who knows..... However, no can deny the increased levels of carbon dioxide because it is true. Not to mention, the burning of fossil fuels and exhaust/emissions from automobiles surely can't be good for the atmosphere not to mention the planet as a whole. Not to mention, the earth is over the 6 Billion marker in population which means the rapid rate of pollution will continue....... Will any of this affect us in our lifetime? Probably not. But in my daughter's lifetime? Its hard to say.

Abortion: I'm totally against the destruction of life. Any woman who wants to kill her child because she's too young or whatever should be denied that right. However, if my wife/daughter were to be raped, I might change my thought process. If the pregnancy could put my family members at risk, then I'm all for sacrificing the embryo. I think doctors should have the final say so. Sorry.

Constitution lovers: I'm all about the constitution. It makes America what it is today. It created America. However, people who try to use the argument against the Democrats about the Constitution need to consider taking a politics class or something. Because if they do, they'll realize that over the course of American history, the original constitution has been changed!!!! That's right, women being able to vote and African Americans being able to vote WERE NOT part of the original constitution. Not to mention, laws have changed. So people really need to lay off of the whole constitution argument.

Health Care: Maybe some people don't realize it, but Insurance companies are robbing folks. Not only are they robbing folks and making unreal profits, they will quickly drop a person who has some type of extensive cancer in a heartbeat. It happens. Not to mention, my step father is an Independent contractor. I hear from him that Insurance rates are outrageous. So do I think that some type of health care reform is a bad idea? Hell no I don't.

Democrats: America's new public enemy. However, just remember that if it wasn't for the Democrats, there wouldn't be an MGIB for military. Nor would there be anytype of Medicaid/Medicare for our elderly and poor. When it comes to poor, everyone should get off their aces and work. But how our government treats our elderly is ****ing disgrace. Sorry Republicans.

The wars: I'm against the wars, but there's no point in turning back now. However, the wars are the sole reason as to why our economy is ****. Contractors charge the government outrageous prices not to mention the daily cost to fund the war and fuel and the Bush Administrations policy of allowing the banks to do as they will without any type of regulation....

Rush Limbaugh: A disgrace..

wait, you mean you don't fall on one side or another? IMPOSSIBLE! this web-site will explode in 3...2...1...

Leroy Lizard
3/11/2010, 07:20 PM
Constitution lovers: I'm all about the constitution. It makes America what it is today. It created America. However, people who try to use the argument against the Democrats about the Constitution need to consider taking a politics class or something. Because if they do, they'll realize that over the course of American history, the original constitution has been changed!!!! That's right, women being able to vote and African Americans being able to vote WERE NOT part of the original constitution. Not to mention, laws have changed. So people really need to lay off of the whole constitution argument.

The Constitution has changed legitimately through the amendment process, sure. Everyone knows that. So I don't see where the controversy is.


Health Care: Maybe some people don't realize it, but Insurance companies are robbing folks. Not only are they robbing folks and making unreal profits, they will quickly drop a person who has some type of extensive cancer in a heartbeat. It happens. Not to mention, my step father is an Independent contractor. I hear from him that Insurance rates are outrageous. So do I think that some type of health care reform is a bad idea? Hell no I don't.

I think everyone is in favor of health care reform if it improves the situation and does not overstep the federal government's bounds and does not sabotage the economy. So where's the controversy?


wait, you mean you don't fall on one side or another? IMPOSSIBLE! this web-site will explode in 3...2...1...

Gee, he didn't blow us away with all of his conservative views. (The only one he offered, abortion, wasn't really conservative because he stated that he would change his mind if the issue hit him personally.)

I love it when liberals try to play centrist. :)

EnragedOUfan
3/11/2010, 07:24 PM
Ah, the liberal argument. Tell me, what is a liberal? That's the problem with politics. Its all about liberal this, conservative that when it should be about facts and what's best for the American people let alone the world.

GrapevineSooner
3/11/2010, 10:52 PM
Coca-Cola just reported profits in 4Q of 2009 of $1.54 billion last month (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61829W20100209).

Are they robbing people?

SCOUT
3/11/2010, 11:01 PM
Avatar cost $237MM to make and has grossed $2,800MM. That seems like a decent profit margin. Do you think that is more or less than United Health Care?

delhalew
3/12/2010, 12:11 AM
"Lay off the constitution arguement".
Blow it out your ***. How 'bout that?
Amendments are one thing. Even though our courts like to twist them in a manner that is un constitutional. Add that to straight up legislation from the bench and you get this cluster****. The further we get from our founding document the more ****ed we are.
Why don't you do some reading? It was made clear that for the republic to work, we needed to stick t original intent.
All the arguements from the various conventions are available, and spell things out very clearly. What you find is those crusty old wig wearing farts were brilliant.
These were men that studied every civilization from the Peloponesions to the Roman empire. On numurous occasions during their debates, these men predicted the precise problems we now have with our corrupt and distant federal gubment and gave us the tools to avoid it. All we had to do was refrain from being lazy *********s.
Yeah for us!

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/12/2010, 12:37 AM
"Lay off the constitution arguement".
Blow it out your ***. How 'bout that?
Amendments are one thing. Even though our courts like to twist them in a manner that is un constitutional. Add that to straight up legislation from the bench and you get this cluster****. The further we get from our founding document the more ****ed we are.
Why don't you do some reading? It was made clear that for the republic to work, we needed to stick t original intent.
All the arguements from the various conventions are available, and spell things out very clearly. What you find is those crusty old wig wearing farts were brilliant.
These were men that studied every civilization from the Peloponesions to the Roman empire. On numurous occasions during their debates, these men predicted the precise problems we now have with our corrupt and distant federal gubment and gave us the tools to avoid it. All we had to do was refrain from being lazy *********s.
Yeah for us!EGGSALADNT! ONE of your best political posts, evar.

EnragedOUfan
3/12/2010, 03:39 AM
"Blow it out your ***. How 'bout that?
Amendments are one thing. Even though our courts like to twist them in a manner that is un constitutional."

Please enlighten me as to which Amendments are quote on quote unconstitutional. Please.............

Are you saying the Amendments that allowed African Americans being freed from slavery, being able to vote, and women being able to vote are unconstitutional? WTF are you talking about man?

Add that to straight up legislation from the bench and you get this cluster****. The further we get from our founding document the more ****ed we are. Why don't you do some reading? It was made clear that for the republic to work, we needed to stick t original intent."

No sh%t Sherlock. Just don't forget that the Constitution was created because the Articles of Confederation were flawed. Therefore, things changed. Just like Amendments being added to the constitution are considered changes. Yes, the original Constitution is a brilliant masterpiece, but over the course of history it had to be tweaked a little.

EnragedOUfan
3/12/2010, 03:42 AM
Coca-Cola just reported profits in 4Q of 2009 of $1.54 billion last month (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61829W20100209).

Are they robbing people?

Well genius, if I break my arm, I surely don't have to spend money on a Coca-Cola. However, to get my arm fixed, depending on my financial status it could be devastating.

EnragedOUfan
3/12/2010, 03:44 AM
Avatar cost $237MM to make and has grossed $2,800MM. That seems like a decent profit margin. Do you think that is more or less than United Health Care?

Sorry, but spending money for leisure activities is largely different than spending money on HEALTH!

delhalew
3/12/2010, 09:55 AM
"Tweaked" :D. "Little":o

AggieTool
3/12/2010, 09:56 AM
Health Care: Maybe some people don't realize it, but Insurance companies are robbing folks. Not only are they robbing folks and making unreal profits, they will quickly drop a person who has some type of extensive cancer in a heartbeat. It happens. Not to mention, my step father is an Independent contractor. I hear from him that Insurance rates are outrageous. So do I think that some type of health care reform is a bad idea? Hell no I don't.



Care to guess what the profit margin of a health insurance company is?

Ever asked yourself why premiums are so high?

Do you think artificially keeping them down with legislation is going to work?

Get back with us on that...

tommieharris91
3/12/2010, 11:28 AM
It's official.

http://www.my-two-cents.net/forenpix/thread-is-gay.jpg

GrapevineSooner
3/12/2010, 11:38 AM
Approximately 200 million people have health insurance in this country. Last year, the biggest health insurers (i.e. United Healthcare, Aetna, Cigna, Humana, BCBS) raked in 'record profits (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/health-insurers-post-record-profits/story?id=9818699&page=3)' of $12.2 billion while overall spending in healthcare accounted for $2.5 TRILLION.

You do math, like George Will did, and tell me that if you confiscated all those profits, poured them back into the healthcare industry, how long would it take to blow through $12.2 billion?

I'll tell you.

48 hours, give or take a few.

And if you took those profits and gave them back to all the policy holders in the form of a dividend, you'd get back about $61.

Which last time I checked, isn't enough to even pay for an office visit at my family physician.

GrapevineSooner
3/12/2010, 11:44 AM
All that having been said, yes there are major problems with healthcare.

I do believe we should provide a safety net for those who, through no fault of their own, lost their job and thus, lost their healthcare.

But just as it's idiotic for people like Sarah Palin to push the 'death panel meme' since insurance companies have 'death panels' too, it's also idiotic to use the profits of healthcare companies to try and argue for a government run system.

OklahomaTuba
3/12/2010, 11:54 AM
So a surge in Afghanistan, his Patriot Act renewal, his recored setting defense budget. In your estimation are these not center minded policies?I did mention those earlier in this tread as thing I agree 100% with him on. Although he took way to long to make up his mind on the surge in Afghanistan, and somehow thinks giving a time table for us to hightail it outta there is smart.

But I do commend him for ultimately doing the right thing on that.

Which is my point to begin with.

JohnnyMack
3/12/2010, 12:05 PM
Although he took way to long to make up his mind on the surge in Afghanistan

Can you please compare and contrast BHO's decision making process and time line as it relates to increasing troop levels in Afghanistan against W's decision making process and time line for the implementation of "The Surge"? Thanks.

OklahomaTuba
3/12/2010, 12:11 PM
Can you please compare and contrast BHO's decision making process and time line as it relates to increasing troop levels in Afghanistan against W's decision making process and time line for the implementation of "The Surge"? Thanks.You mean "The Surge" that Dear Leader called a mistake and a failure??

The idear for the surge didn't come until Petreus was put in charge. Bush didn't waffle on that like or call it a failure when it was an obvious success. He also didn't ignore his general for 6+ months.

JohnnyMack
3/12/2010, 12:16 PM
You mean "The Surge" that Dear Leader called a mistake and a failure??

The idear for the surge didn't come until Petreus was put in charge. Bush didn't waffle on that like or call it a failure when it was an obvious success. He also didn't ignore his general for 6+ months.

Not exactly what I was talking about, but thanks for attempting to have a rational thought.

Fraggle145
3/12/2010, 12:44 PM
This thread makes me want to masturbate with a hammer...

olevetonahill
3/12/2010, 12:48 PM
This thread makes me want to masturbate with a hammer...

You better get in that Merlin Olsen thread
They sayin You DEAD :eek:

Harry Beanbag
3/12/2010, 01:24 PM
Care to guess what the profit margin of a health insurance company is?

Ever asked yourself why premiums are so high?

Do you think artificially keeping them down with legislation is going to work?

Get back with us on that...

3.4%, about average.

http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains.html

Ike
3/12/2010, 02:37 PM
All that having been said, yes there are major problems with healthcare.

I do believe we should provide a safety net for those who, through no fault of their own, lost their job and thus, lost their healthcare.

But just as it's idiotic for people like Sarah Palin to push the 'death panel meme' since insurance companies have 'death panels' too, it's also idiotic to use the profits of healthcare companies to try and argue for a government run system.

Honestly, it's not the profits of the healthcare companies that are the real driving reason for government intervention in heath care (the current bill is hardly a government run system...there is no public option.), although to hear a lot of Democrats speak, it's hard to fault people for believing that it is.
Its the fact that heath care is by it's very nature is a market that is all f'd up. The fact that we have the term "Medical bankruptcy" is evidence of this fact. Supply and demand simply don't set prices. Demand for any medical service is more the result of chance than any kind of market forces. (people getting sick, and doctors recommending a particular service.)

Combine this with the fact that we are approaching a Health-Insurance-Death-Spiral, and it's easy to see why a lot of people would prefer a public option or single-payer. What is a Health Insurance Death Spiral you ask? Well, with insurance as it is currently, pretty much everyone is either a) subsidising someone elses care, b) having their care subsidised, or c) out of the system. Generally speaking the people in category A) are young and healthy. The people in category B) are older and/or have chronic illnesses. and the people in category C) are a mix of both. When health insurance premiums rise (as they have done quite a lot lately), what tends to happen is that the least well off young/healthy people decide that they can no longer afford insurance, and drop it...basically betting that they won't develop some "pre-existing condition" before they are well off enough to purchase insurance again...for the most part some people move from category A to category C. The people in category B generally know that dropping insurance is never an option for them. For the insurance company though, this basically means that they are taking a near-complete loss on the premiums that they lost. They weren't having to pay out much for category A people in the first place. So they have to raise rates again on everyone left in their plan....meaning that another slice of category-a people are likely to drop off.....and this continues until....???? No one is really sure. This is exactly why insurance companies currently have "pre-existing condition" terms in their policies. It serves to discourage people from dropping coverage completely, thus ensuring that there are enough category A folks around to subsidise the care of the category B folks. (and the category C people who don't go to the doctor until it's time to go to the ER, and then can't pay the bill).

Most everyone would like to get rid of the pre-existing condition language, but there simply isn't a way to do so without mandating coverage for everyone. And if you mandate coverage for everyone, you then have to do something else that doesn't make being poor a crime.

Anyway, the net goal is to keep as many 'category A' people "in the system" so to speak. Thats really the only way to keep insurance premiums low. This is also why many would rather have single payer. As it stands now we have many "systems", and they all have random distributions of category A and B people. One avenue of competition amongst companies is to do everything they can legally do to only get category A people and not category B people (through avenues like trying to target their marketing only to healthy people). They can keep costs down for healthy people that way for a while (until those people start getting older), and that usually means that those healthy people aren't in a 'system' where they are subsidising care for category B people...basically raising other peoples costs. If there is only one 'system' it makes things a lot easier to deal with.

The downside to that is obviously that in a single-payer system, what is and isn't covered can become a political football...among other things.

picasso
3/12/2010, 04:52 PM
i just wanted to throw out a kudos to president obama. i think he's doing a decent job so far. with the situation he inherited it's been an extremely tough job, but he's holding his own. not perfect, but i'm excited about him as he moves into the next three and most likely 7 years...

What the hell man. Isn't Obama the cause of some of the problems that he inherited?

Did you ever read his voting record in Congress?

XingTheRubicon
3/12/2010, 08:25 PM
I think PDX is abstaining from reading his voting record

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
3/12/2010, 08:32 PM
I think PDX is abstaining from reading his voting recordor, he LIKES Obama's voting record.

PDXsooner
3/12/2010, 08:55 PM
i'm taking a break right now. i'm well into my 3rd Thunderhead IPA and will be in no shape to discuss politics for the rest of the evening. to be continued.

GrapevineSooner
3/12/2010, 11:43 PM
Honestly, it's not the profits of the healthcare companies that are the real driving reason for government intervention in heath care (the current bill is hardly a government run system...there is no public option.), although to hear a lot of Democrats speak, it's hard to fault people for believing that it is.
Its the fact that heath care is by it's very nature is a market that is all f'd up. The fact that we have the term "Medical bankruptcy" is evidence of this fact. Supply and demand simply don't set prices. Demand for any medical service is more the result of chance than any kind of market forces. (people getting sick, and doctors recommending a particular service.)

Combine this with the fact that we are approaching a Health-Insurance-Death-Spiral, and it's easy to see why a lot of people would prefer a public option or single-payer. What is a Health Insurance Death Spiral you ask? Well, with insurance as it is currently, pretty much everyone is either a) subsidising someone elses care, b) having their care subsidised, or c) out of the system. Generally speaking the people in category A) are young and healthy. The people in category B) are older and/or have chronic illnesses. and the people in category C) are a mix of both. When health insurance premiums rise (as they have done quite a lot lately), what tends to happen is that the least well off young/healthy people decide that they can no longer afford insurance, and drop it...basically betting that they won't develop some "pre-existing condition" before they are well off enough to purchase insurance again...for the most part some people move from category A to category C. The people in category B generally know that dropping insurance is never an option for them. For the insurance company though, this basically means that they are taking a near-complete loss on the premiums that they lost. They weren't having to pay out much for category A people in the first place. So they have to raise rates again on everyone left in their plan....meaning that another slice of category-a people are likely to drop off.....and this continues until....???? No one is really sure. This is exactly why insurance companies currently have "pre-existing condition" terms in their policies. It serves to discourage people from dropping coverage completely, thus ensuring that there are enough category A folks around to subsidise the care of the category B folks. (and the category C people who don't go to the doctor until it's time to go to the ER, and then can't pay the bill).

Most everyone would like to get rid of the pre-existing condition language, but there simply isn't a way to do so without mandating coverage for everyone. And if you mandate coverage for everyone, you then have to do something else that doesn't make being poor a crime.

Anyway, the net goal is to keep as many 'category A' people "in the system" so to speak. Thats really the only way to keep insurance premiums low. This is also why many would rather have single payer. As it stands now we have many "systems", and they all have random distributions of category A and B people. One avenue of competition amongst companies is to do everything they can legally do to only get category A people and not category B people (through avenues like trying to target their marketing only to healthy people). They can keep costs down for healthy people that way for a while (until those people start getting older), and that usually means that those healthy people aren't in a 'system' where they are subsidising care for category B people...basically raising other peoples costs. If there is only one 'system' it makes things a lot easier to deal with.

The downside to that is obviously that in a single-payer system, what is and isn't covered can become a political football...among other things.

Oh, I don't disagree with anything you said. We are at a crisis point for a reason. And we have too many people in this country that are having to go at it without any kind of a safety net. That's wrong. At the very least, we have to find a solution for those kinds of people.

I guess I just got fed up with all the stupid arguments that each side is putting forth. You've got the 'health care companies are evil, profit-driven machines' meme. Then you've got Palin pushing so-called 'death panels' (psst, Sarah. insurance companies already have those).

delhalew
3/13/2010, 02:28 AM
i'm taking a break right now. i'm well into my 3rd Thunderhead IPA and will be in no shape to discuss politics for the rest of the evening. to be continued.

This is different how?:eek: :D

Leroy Lizard
3/13/2010, 02:40 AM
For the first time PDX made sense. Now I find out he was in a drunken rage.