Yeah, I believe that one is really frustrating this administration. Obama came into office, apologized to the world for the previous 8 years and expected everyone, including Iran, to jump on the hope and change bandwagon. Most of the world don't fall for the same touchy - feely schmoozing that many Americans like. Some country would hate us, mistrust us, or abuse our good nature even if Mother Theresa (if still alive) were president. I wonder if he gets that yet.

 

Perhaps, I cannot really agree or disagree with your opinion. i am intrigued though, why (according to republicans) Obama should be efficient on this issue, but when he took time to look over Afghanistan - he was wrong in doing so. Seems ironic, and just another moment of party talking points (brain not included).

 

As far as I, and many other american citizens, it's an issue that is paramount to our nation. If we don't hold to our founding principles, then we're full of shit and not truly the land of life, liberty, (equality)and the pursuit of happines like we say we are.

 

Perhaps, when you're talking about non-artificial stem cells - but artificial stem cells (i.e. not living) are widely considered the bridge between the sides in the ethical dispute.

Socialized medicine, just like the socilized programs average americans take for granted? Socialized medicine, like the rationing (and denial) of coverage by insurance companies? Socialism, like the taking of people's money, barely giving adequate service or product and instead lining their workers pockets?

Oh sure... \s

Disclaimer: My comments regarding socialism are sarcastic, and meant to make a point.

 

There were some congress people who read the bill, but overall - yes - neither party read the bill.

Oh please, back door deals and all that are typical politics, republican or democrat. It's nothing new, and the Republicans are by far, definitely no saints in that matter. In politics, deals are made - how do you think the 1876 election went? Or various other events in history? Not saying I'm in favor of it, because I feel that smoetimes there is a point where compromise becomes compromised, but it happens. Neither party can claim any high ground.

 

 

 

 

Um, douche, the 200B is from the stimulous bill that - i believe - the CBO said would cost less than planned. It would be money appropriated (right word?) toward lowering the deficit and creating jobs. Heh, I find it ironic that you're against putting money toward that, since that seems to be the typical republican trumpet. (Lower the deficit!!!) Oh wait, I guess we can't according to you. So your plan is we do...what?

 

 

 

To be blunt charles, and please don't take this personally: Is it "we" believe in? Or is it what you and others like you believe in? Starting false wars? Infringing on liberties? (and so on so forth) Sorry, but that is not what WE believe in.

 

~A

Well, you got to admire one thing.  Obama has Ahmadenijad, Castro, Chavez, Jiaboa and Kim agreeing with Limbaugh and Hannity!  Hoax and Chains!

American liberals love newspeak, but the rest of the world is not that stupid.  Makes you wonder just how stupid you have to be these days to be an american liberal.

What's a "false war", Alderic?

Is it any war you don't agree with or is it limited to American participation in it? (Was the Iraq war a "right war" before the invasion, when Saddam's army was still attacking Kurds? And don't misunderstand this. Whenever the inspectors were not in the country Saddam tried to get the upper hand again. Sooner or later he or one of his crazy sons would have made it.)

Or is "false war" simply an umbrella term for all wars against Arab oppressors of non-Arab peoples?






And why is in "infringing on liberties" an issue for you? Given that liberty only exists due to "false wars", I don't see how you can be against both.

Alderic, do me a favour... whenever you think "false war", I want you to look at these pictures:

(Warning! Some of these are very graphic. I cried when I saw the originals of the second series in a former prison in Iraq where they had been exhibited in a gallery.)

http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

http://www.9neesan.com/halapja/

I want you to look at these pictures so you will know, at the time you think "false war", what Saddam was like and how Iraqis lived (and died) under his rule. I want you to remember these images whenever you say "false war", so that you will know what a monster it was whose rule you wanted to preserve.

If you can look at those pictures and can still speak of a "false war", I will be forced to remind you that you screamed bloody murder when Maine rejected gay marriage yet you call a "false war" that which made it possible for Iraqis even to start dreaming about having your problems in the future.

Ah, there's the rub!  He don't think!  besides, it does not take brains to spout talking points - just a teleprompter as we see each press conference these days.

Besides, isn't "false Wars" a stupid expression?  perhaps what the talking points meant to say was unjust war.  But a false war would be one where a war is declared, but no action taken (kind of what happened after September 1939 until May 1940).  But then I do not expect the talking points to illustrate that stupidity.

It is, which is why I asked him what a "false war" is.

I don't understand the fascination of the left with the Iraq war.

As conflicts go it was one of the smallest (despite made-up casualty numbers by journalists who apparently didn't find Iraq too dangerous to go there and report). It was also one of the few that actually achieved something (Iraq is free now).

 

Let's see, the Afghanistan issue was a simple yes or no based on current data from people who are in the field in a situation that was currently in progress and demanded a quick response. If both sides of the Afghanistan ordeal would pause for a moment while Obama made a decision then we would not need to rush him. But the reason for the decision was a matter of whether we might or might not lose control of that situation.

The Healthcare issue is one where even if they decided today to pass this bill it would not have real effects (if any) for a long time and considering the amount of people that could be affected by this and considering this is a long term decision as oppose to a short "surge" that will affect this country for years to come, this decision needs to be well thought out, discussed and agreed upon not just by one party but by both sides.

To compare the healthcare of an entire nation for years or even decades to come with the need to overtake the enemies revitalized will is not exactly a great comparison AJ. You may see this as some kind of talking point but in reality it is you who are looking for reasons to complain considering even you agree this current bill passing thru should be stopped. So you really need to make up your mind. You either disagree with this current healthcare bill as Republicans do or you are simply complaining because of the fact that Republicans are against it.

And here is where you always get lost in the point. It's not about lowering the deficit, it's about whether they can actually do it with their proposal. You seem to always focus on the results but fail to notice the actions taken to get these results. You usually fail to notice it is the action that most of us are against, not the results. This is why Democrats and Republicans, Liberals and Coservatives and everyone at the same time insults each other, because most people miss the point of everything.

I am not against healthcare reform, I am against the current concept of how to reform it. I am not against keeping my planet clean, I am against the concept on how to achieve it that will hurt me and many others in the process. I am not in favor of war, but I accept that sometimes it's what it takes to get things done. I am not against helping those in need, I am against the process that is proposed that while it seems to help it actually creates a a bigger problem by creating dependancy.

It's not about the results most of us argue, it's about the method proposed to get the results.

Excellent points!  But I would take it a step further (clarification wise).  It is not about the titles, it is about the spin.  The title is "health Care reform", yet the whole purpose has nothing to do with Health Care reform, but Health INSURANCE reform.  So under the truth in advertising laws (that unfortunately government does not have to obey), it is all a lie. The 4000+ pages in congress right now will do nothing to reform health care.

Same with polution.  They say "Global climate change" and again it is a lie.  It is not GCC, but at best AGC, and more specifically AGW.  And the methods (which you rightly point out) will do NOTHING for that since all it will be doing is selling indulgences (basically moving the poluters from point A to point B and then pocketing a hefty commission from the move).

But those who yell and berate and belittle the opposition yell loudest when someone tries to restore truth in advertising.  Like vampires, they cannot stand for their pet projects to see the light of day.

I have to admit I too find this fascination with the Iraq War confusing. Many legit reasons were given as to why we went to war with Iraq but the only one they stick with is the whole WMD thing. Funny thing is none of them are happy there were none, instead, they are mad we didn't find any. If that is not confusing I don't know what is.

You know what saddens me the most? That rather than seeking some kind of compromise where both parties come as close as possible together and agree on what's best for this Nation and it's people, those who are are political party fanboys would rather the other party have little if anything to do with decision making just because of their party affiliation. So sad if you ask me.

That has always been the case in the house where 50%+1 is the rule.  However in years past, since the Senate required 60, there was usually some facade placed on it to make it look bi-partisan (by both parties).  This year there is no need, so they just dropped the facade.  I dont fool myself for a minute to think the republicans would not do the same given the power.  But then instead of Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman, you would be having stories about Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.

I agree. Republicans would not hesitate either. I have to believe that sooner or later all this has to stop and our Gov't can be run more decently. I would hate to think that the people of this nation would be dumb enough to revert back to the same economic system that got us here in the first place (massive credit debt). I wanna believe we can avoid that and eventually change this current political mentality we have in all 3 houses and every gov't office in every state. This is why sometimes I don't mind people getting screwed in the process; it's human nature to learn things the hard way sometimes. Think about it, how did we ever find out fire can hurt you if you stick your hand in it?

Life's experiences can be rough.  But as we see, some never learn (liberals).  As for the rest, well that is why I figure we needed an Obama.  Some may just be smart enough to learn from the worst.

OK slight change in plans for the Obama administration. Now that Brown has won the senate seat in Massachusetts what will be the next move?

- Will the Democrats force the heath care issue? The loss in MA must be giving pause to some moderate Dem's, at least those that might lose their seat in November. 

- Will Reid stall seating Brown to give Dem's time to push the HC bill?

- Will the House Dem's take the Senates HC plan "as is" just to push it through to get something?

The next few days will be interesting, to be sure. Is the Democratic Party willing to commit political hari kari to push the agenda through? Events are now modeling 1994 more than ever. Will Obama take note and move to the center, or does his far left base dictate he continues as is?

One big factor that wasn't present in force during 1994 is of course the Internet. Ideas travel quicker than ever. Will the first president that used technology to his advantage in the 2008 campaign be able to use it to his advantage now?