Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner
by FUDU » Tue Dec 15, 2009 8:38 pm
by jack_tors » Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:34 pm
FUDU wrote:Obama.Between the Copenhagen meetings on climate change and this health care bill this guy has us on the brink of disaster. Word is he is heavily leaning toward signing pretty much whatever gets proposed in Copenhagen, which means the US taxpayer is getting fucked hard. Plus he is already on record as saying he will pass health care reform, couple that with two different senators quoted as saying "We are passing this health care bill". This, meaning this one. Connect the dots.I know it is a pipe dream to think this can be a non partisan and objective discussion about what this guy is doing right now, but I' ll ask anyway, if not just for the sake of the Lead man giving odds on how many posts in this will turn ugly and how long it will take for this to turn into Bush bashing and or Clinton blow job talk. Honestly this health care bill right now is not a good solution, what is on the table right now is pure garbage and the people do not want IT. Let alone Obama has said he will not pass a bill that adds to the deficit, interesting coming from the leader of an admin that is on an outrageous spending spree. Yet the representatives, under his watch, are hell bent on passing anything they can just for the sake of saying "see look what we did". It is absurd. Not to mention if he does sign a treaty on climate change, a treaty in which we will have little to no control over, we will still be footing the bill. It makes no sense, but guess what, it is all going to happen.I didn't vote for this guy, but he won and as the president of my country I have rooted him on, hoping he could do the two big things he claimed he would do....bring change and transparency. He is 0-2 and he is doubling down his bet with our future as collateral.
by FUDU » Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:55 pm
I too second your hope for a good non partisan, objective talk and will try my best to keep it going.I voted for the guy, not because I believed the hype but because McCain is.. McCain. So here we are a year later and what has changed? Still have a rampant deficit, two foreign wars with no end in sight, and are now focusing on health care. Really, its no wonder his approval numbers are so low right now.Look, I know the guy took on a bunch of crap and desperately wants to change things but perhaps his focus is too wide. We need to do the following, preferably in this order:1.) Attack the deficit- We all have a deficit, its part of life. However, this massive, basically unchecked deficit is going to cut the legs out from other so much of the programs and changes he wants to enact.2.) Cut wasteful spending - Anyone, regardless of party could find something that fits this scenario. Run the govt like a freaking business, not some group of organizations with a blank check.3.)Build a successful strategy for both wars- Smarter military men than I can speak to how we do this but we have to find a way out of here.If he focused on these things, I would be much happier. I agree we need to overhaul the health care system. However, I think the priorities I listed are higher and we need to spend the time to reform health care the right way. As Fudu pointed out, no one wants this and its effects will be marginal at best.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:12 pm
by aoxo1 » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:29 pm
by swerb » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:34 pm
by Orenthal » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:48 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:We're never getting out of debt. How many hundreds of billions of dollars do we owe the Chinese?
by jack_tors » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:13 am
Swerb wrote:I saw the clip last night of where Obama was asked to grade himself so far as President. Gave himself a B+ ... said he'd be an A for sure if he can get health care through.Just thought it was inappropriate for him to answer that question, then sound so smug in doing so.
Swerb wrote:He did the right thing by sending more troops to Afghanistan, but waited too long, didn't give the general what he asked for, and by setting a timetable ... I believe that emboldens the enemies who will just lie in wait for us to leave. These assholes we're dealing with are calculating patient mother fuckers. I just think the people that hate us and want to hurt us ... they laugh at this guy. They hate us no less because Obama is President and not Bush. Our perception amongst more neutral countries is clearly improved under Obama.
Swerb wrote:I hate the fact how he still blames Bush for everything. Strong leaders don't make excuses and look backwards, they demand results and look forward.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:26 am
A 20% across the board reduction in all department spending
by Orenthal » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:32 am
aoxo1 wrote:1) Restore the top marginal rate to what it was under Clinton, and add in some addition tiers at 500k, 1m, 5m, 10m. It's not fair that the rich pay a smaller percentage of their income in tax than the rest of us, and that's before figuring in the additional benefit they receive from capital gains. Likewise, ensure the solvency of SSI (and no, I don't buy that there is a crisis, as it is funded fine for another 30+ years) by raising the maximum taxable earnings from the current $106,800.2) Don't pass HCR with what it is shaping up to be, which is just a huge giveaway to the insurance industry.3) GTFO of both Iraq and Afghanistan. Bring our men and women home. They have done more than anyone could ask. As a minor aside, the amount of money we are spending every year dwarfs the numbers bandied about for things like HCR.4) Focus on jobs and growing the economy instead of closing the deficit. Reducing the deficit cannot be done unless the economy grows and tax revenues increase. The primary reason for the large current deficit is reduced revenue, not increased spending. Things like TARP and the stimulus were one time things; take a look at the long term budget projections and it is not pretty even after these outlays are no longer there.5) Extend unemployment benefits.6) Enact some goddamn regulations on Wall Street.7) Go back in time and punch Alan Greenspan in the face for giving cover to those who thought we needed to squander the surplus and go back to deficits back in 2000.
by Orenthal » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:36 am
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:A 20% across the board reduction in all department spendingYou include the defense department in that?
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:38 am
Orenthal wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:A 20% across the board reduction in all department spendingYou include the defense department in that?Come on CDT did you read my whole post? Of course the fuck it does... I worked in the DoD. The waste there is no different then at any liberal feel good department. Across the board. I think allowing the liberal and conservative think tanks to just hammer the shit out of the budget would expose both sides pork, then the admin would finalize. Hopefully making this fully transparent, and letting the admin make final decisions, would lead to real, evenhanded, and meaningful cuts.I am such a bull on cutting government spending that I have almost no sacred cows...
by Orenthal » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:39 am
by Orenthal » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:51 am
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Orenthal wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:A 20% across the board reduction in all department spendingYou include the defense department in that?Come on CDT did you read my whole post? Of course the fuck it does... I worked in the DoD. The waste there is no different then at any liberal feel good department. Across the board. I think allowing the liberal and conservative think tanks to just hammer the shit out of the budget would expose both sides pork, then the admin would finalize. Hopefully making this fully transparent, and letting the admin make final decisions, would lead to real, evenhanded, and meaningful cuts.I am such a bull on cutting government spending that I have almost no sacred cows...20%..... I like it. I cheered when they cut the F-22 and the Laser Plane.
by FUDU » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:44 am
by jfiling » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:26 am
FUDU wrote:aoxo, extend unemployment benefits? How about cut them back big time. Extending them continues the ever growing trend of wealth redistribution that this admin thrives on, no more enabling a do nothing attitude to get by.To Rich's point on Obama grading himself, not only was it arrogant to answer the question but a B+? The guy hasn't addressed the two major points in which he ran on, change and transparency, in that regards sounds much more like a C or a D to me. Let alone his point included in that response "we were left with the biggest mess in history" really Obama blaming what what down before you took over in terms of grading your actions to date?In regards to the two big issues I mentioned at the start, this guy is selling us out, big time.
by FUDU » Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:35 pm
by FUDU » Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:30 pm
by Ziner » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:23 pm
by jfiling » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:30 pm
Ziner wrote:Perhaps I can go line by line on the HC bill tomorrow, dont have the time to put towards it like I would like to today, but here is the problem as I see it. A lot of the ideas in the health care bill are good things, its the consequences I worry about.
by FUDU » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:33 pm
by Ziner » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:57 pm
FUDU wrote:If there is truth to the rumors that states are suing over this, and those lawsuits carry weight, I hope those states can make some real traction.
by Orenthal » Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:11 pm
by hebner20 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:13 pm
by FUDU » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:24 pm
by Orenthal » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:36 pm
by Ziner » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:42 pm
Orenthal wrote:Just on simple economic principle the "good things" in this bill are also the ones that many want to accept as free. Pre-existing conditions and 26 year old childern as quick examples. Also just starting to creep into my mind is how did this automatically cover the 32 million people who did not have insurance? At first that was being done with the public option opt in, but did the reasons those 32 million do not currently have insurance vanish? I guess yiu can mandate they purchase insurance, but if yer broke, how does the mandate make you afford insurance?
by waborat » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:52 pm
by FUDU » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:53 pm
by waborat » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:01 pm
FUDU wrote:Not to mention the inefficiency that can be expected from the new system. We're going to have to add numerous jobs to the mix (on the surface a good thing right?) yet how does that increase efficiency AND lower overall cost of the system? IIRC the IRS is going to track the individual mandate part, meaning something upwards of a couple hundred more IRS people on the books?Politics are truly the big business of this country, sad.
by hebner20 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:31 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:52 pm
by skatingtripods » Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:10 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:24 pm
Skating Tripods wrote:On the bright side, if there is a bright side to this ass-wiping of the Constitution, RCP's latest polls have Congress at a 77% disapproval rating. Kasich and Portman both ahead early in the polls for Ohio Governor and Ohio Senate.Obama's approval numbers have dropped 16% since the end of January on RCP's polls. He actually got a 51% disapproval rating from the latest Communist News Network poll.http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/image ... /rel5b.pdf
by Ziner » Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:28 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:And ofcourse Kasich is ahead, he's gonna win. A moldy hotdog bun could beat Strickland at this point.
by skatingtripods » Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:51 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:The President's approval rating means nothing. See the 2004 Election. He'll still win re-election in 2012.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:11 pm
Skating Tripods wrote:The President's approval rating would mean something if the opposing party offered up a decent candidate. There was nothing to like about John Kerry.
by skatingtripods » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:21 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:That's always the problem. I facepalmed when Kerry was chosen. It would've been better to run a cardboard box, the similar personalities are obvious. Most Republicans I talk to still have no clue as to who will run in 2012.
by Ziner » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:36 pm
by jfiling » Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:14 pm
by jack_tors » Thu Mar 25, 2010 4:44 pm
Ziner wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:And ofcourse Kasich is ahead, he's gonna win. A moldy hotdog bun could beat Strickland at this point.I'd vote for the bun over either...
by Cease » Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:47 pm
Skating Tripods wrote: Nobody seems to know. Palin will show up and get blown away during the primary.
by Ziner » Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:18 pm
Cease wrote:Skating Tripods wrote: Nobody seems to know. Palin will show up and get blown away during the primary. You may have uncovered the serviceable value of Mrs. Sarah Palin. That being the GOP allowing her to trot out in the primary for the sole purpose of giving her the collective as a party candidate- signalling the message that they've learned something since 2008. Her crowd will get the point and she'll get in line.IMO, The GOP needs to separate from 2008 completely and follow up with a smart, young-ish candidate to hold up in stark contrast to Obama on the basis of policy. Obama wins again if it comes down to contrasting generations, he'll have to be out-reasoned. Not out-moral-ed, out-smeared, or out-experienced. Global paradigms have shifted and swing voters seem to be looking for the smartest new way to do things. GOP's got to roll out their economic principles and challenge swing voters to consider the party's logic from the ground up. Find the right passionate voice who chooses logic over dogma and you've got yourself a race. Does that person exist? Would GOP heads be so brave? Dunno.PS. I think I made a big mistake posting something political. Don't usually do it.
by FUDU » Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:22 pm
by municipalmutt » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:17 pm
by FUDU » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:42 pm
municipalmutt wrote:Ever heard of the hustle 'two brothers and a stranger"? It was from the Color Of Money.Republicans are being portrayed by the dems as the patsies of the big health insurance lobby by vehemently opposing health reform. Meanwhile the real con is the fact that the dem's new health bill makes it manditory for everyone to buy health insurance. So who got fucked here and who made out? If everyone (est 20-30 million) has to purchase health insurance either on their own or gubmint subsidized, how did the health insurance industry get bent over in this? They made out like fucking bandits.This is why I laugh at people arguing republican or democrat. The end result is the same and would have been the same if the old white dude would have been elected.
Return to No Holds Barred
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest