I don't need to brag in any way about what I do. If someone does that, it's hardly charity IMO. With that said, I don't see where it's ever appropriate to attack a person on a board with no basis for the attack in regards to their personal life.

As for the argument that I'm somehow little more than a talking point machine, it's false and I've proved that repeatedly. No one bothers to discuss it when I agree with Obama (which I have several times), but they'll attack me the moment I agree with the Republican side of things. Why? There's little question why.

And I'm not going to feed the unicorns and rainbows view of the world like you would prefer. There's a lot of crap being fed through the government right now, and most of it is equally as nasty as the spending increases under Bush. Ignoring it does nothing, though you're certainly welcome to ignore my opinions and links if you choose to do so. It would be an improvement over unwarranted personal attacks for sure.

You seem awfully cranky these days, Mike.

So stating that his unwarranted attack was false is now 'playing the innocent victim'? I apologize. I thought I was correcting a false statement. My mistake.

I work in a state with among the highest unemployment, whose leaders think it's more important to brand textbooks as theories and ban stem cell research instead of putting plans forward to do something. The University is cutting 10-15% (because of the state budget) and I am about to be on teaching duty again this semester.

Oh, and I have a 4 month old meaning I'm neither getting laid or sleeping :banghead: :banghead:

:p

Hey, at least you have a beautiful child who will one day sleep through the night, right? I know that doesn't help much. I don't actually remember much from when my youngest were that age. I was sleeping in the guest room since my wife wanted the twins in bed with her to make nursing easier. I got sleep, but that was about it. :p

As for the teaching duties, what are your usual job duties? Is this something that you're not supposed to be doing? Look on the bright side... at least now you can get valuable face-to-face indoctrination time with the next generation. ;)

Ain't that the truth. My wife & I were just talking about our almost-1-year-old and thinking about how our memories of, say, the first 3 months are somewhat hazy. I mean, we remember the good (i.e. cute) stuff, but we know that it was uber-hard, just not the exact details of why it was uber-hard.

I think this is how people convince themselves to have another kid, honestly.... :D

Well I received an e-mail today from my very conservative great Aunt and Uncle (former Priest and Nun who are shockingly on Medicare). In this forward that many others have passed on is a massive list of bullshit about the plan. Here are a few of the talking points:

- We will apparently be euthanizing old people.
- You'll be required to speak other languages
- Required to sign power of attorney over to people
- Can't pick your doctor
- Tons of stuff about ACORN that didn't make sense
- Mandatory abortions!
- Government taking over all medical schools
- Government will dictate what you are allowed to eat

There's a lot more. I mean I know many of these people are not too bright and would struggle to read through a couple pages of the actual bill. But the misinformation out there is really crazy. I understand people not wanting it because they think it won't work or will cost too much. But to have the party give credibility to ridiculous euthanasia myths shows they really don't have much to stand on. When people can't win on the issue, they make stuff up.

I personally don't care either way anymore. I can afford insurance and will (knock on wood) always be able to. The people up in arms are the ones that need some form of health care reform the most. The Red states are the unhealthiest and the ones with the worst life expectancy rates.

Here's a thorough debunking of that email:

PolitiFact | E-mail 'analysis' of health bill needs a check-up

You can say that you're unbias, but lets be honest here. You weren't posting daily about Bush spending like crazy but you are about Obama. It just seems to me that the D and R mean more to you than the actual issue at hand. Otherwise I'd be able to search back in time and find your outrage toward the last Medicare changes.

The game between the parties is more important to some than the issues. There isn't anything wrong with it, to each their own. But don't get all bent out of shape when people tell you that's what you're doing.

It's faux anyways.

IIRC, according to CBO estimates and the like, its not going to fund the health program, regardless of "how the current bill is set up". It's a pipe dream. And if you think that it will be possible to fund the program with "how the current bill is set up", then I have a bridge to sell you.

Guess what, there will be explosion in the deficit and then people will be told that taxes will have to be raised on everyone to close the deficit.

...and the circle of stupid is complete. Sarah Palin says that Obama's "Death Panel" could have her Down Syndrome baby killed

AdolfOliverPanties

2009-08-07 06:14:14 PM

GOOD GOD THIS WOMAN IS A FARKING MORAN!

Trig is in no danger. He is the brains of the family.

How about they come up with actual constructive criticism and ideas instead of just lies to scare people? WTF!!!!

Rep. John Boehner: Your tax dollars will be used for abortions - FALSE

Liberty Counsel: School health clinics will indoctrinate your children and abort your grandchildren - PANTS ON FIRE

Club for Growth: People will be allowed to die if their treatments are too expensive - FALSE

Rep. Dan Lungren: The government will tell old women who need pacemakers to just take a pain pill instead - FALSE

Former NY Lt. Gov Betsy McCaughey: The government will require old people to get end-of-life counseling to tell them how to end their life sooner - PANTS ON FIRE

Investors Business Daily: The health care bill outlaws private insurance - PANTS ON FIRE

Hot Karl Rove: 120 million will lose their insurance and be forced onto government rolls - FALSE

Mitch McConnel: A public option will end private insurance because it they won't be able to compete - BARELY TRUE

Conservatives for Patients' Rights: Your healthcare costs will go up 95% if you buy your own insurance - BULLCRAP

Family Research Council: Surgery for seniors won't be funded, but abortions will - BULLCRAP

Patients United Now: We're going Canadian - BULLCRAP

Would you say then that your posted criticisms have been equally fair towards Obama and Bush spending?

Germany's Cash-For-Clunkes Corruption
Germany's Cash-for-Clunkers Black-Market Scandal - Yahoo! News

First of all, I thought the Obama administation invented "Cash for Clunkers". I guess not.

Facts from the article.

1. The German version allows any vehicle nine years or older to be turned in for 3,600 tax-payer dollars.

2. The Germans have a limit set at aound $7.2 billion dollars for their program that started in February. (for us to match their effort, based on population alone, we will ultimately need to earmark aound $15 billion for this program.)

Concerns raised in the article

1. Police are estimating that Germans "scrapped" 50,000 clunkers that have made their way to eastern Europe/Africa. So those cars aren't saving the environment anyway. That's $180 million German tax-payer dollars that were used to set up a fairly lucrative black-market for older cars and just moves the pollution to other countries/regions.

I think I've been pretty consistent in terms of bashing both sides on spending. I criticized Bush for wasteful spending on the war in Iraq and selling out Medicare to Big Pharma. I've criticized Obama for cash for clunkers and the stimulus package.

While I'm fiscally conservative on most stuff, I do think health care should be treated the same way we treat police and fire services. Something that we are all entitled to. I don't think it should raise the deficit though and the money should come from other areas like welfare, foreign aid, closing tax loopholes, and some major reforms in many departments of government.

Okay, I didn't realize that you were equally vocal against Bush spending and Obama spending. I'm sure it was just an inaccurate perception I developed.

That's not more important to me and I've been very consistent in that manner. I come down on both sides of the issue depending on the topic. If you're here to argue the bias of a person, that's fine. I'm here to argue the issues. As bad as Bush was in regard to economics, it wasn't nearly as bad as what we're seeing under Obama with the deficit.

Noticed this morning that there's been a rash of town hall meetings canceled due to 'security concerns'. It can be easily argued at this point that the Democrats went to the people and didn't like the response, so they just took the ball and ran back to Washington. Judging from their reactions at some of these smaller events, they don't want to hear people's opinions.

Dennis Moore, a local rep, was going to have his at a place that holds 300 people. After he found out that people who oppose the health care bill would be coming, he moved it to a 30 person coffee shop and issues passes to certain constituents. As a result, he's going to have a large group of people outside the door showing their dissatisfaction at his sudden change of heart. Poor choice and not in the interest of the general public.

The only thing I'm indoctrinating is to get these kids of out undergraduate mentality (read and regurgitate) and in to graduate school mode (think, plan, and defend). I teach every fall to 1st year grad students, but it's medical-related so politics stays out of it. I do volunteer to go around the community and try to tell people that science is helpful and we're not all out to convince their kids Jesus didn't exist. That, and stem cell research can actually be beneficial and we're not stealing embryos and encouraging abortions.

Teaching is ok, but takes lots of time.

Or there are 'security concerns'...you know like the Congressional security forces investigating death threats and such/


Health care debate degenerates into brawls, death threats - Politics AP - MiamiHerald.com


but I dont want to divert you off your bias and spin train.

Yes, it's really telling that the best GOP argument against this plan is to lie through their teeth.

I'm amazed that so many people are falling for it.

I also especially like the sentiment that so many seniors have like "Keep the government out of my healthcare" while they enjoy the benefit of Medicare. That's some kind of intelligence you got there!

Obviously, this is a strawman argument of the highest magnitude. I'm the one that said that the behavior exhibited in some of these town hall meetings has not been the best. No one has said that violence is appropriate in any way. But that doesn't change the fact that there there are legitimate concerns about the policies being proposed by this administration and the outrage is without question a response to these questionable policies. If anything, the majority of people who have legitimate concerns should be pissed off that a couple of yahoos decided to prank a death threat. It's given representatives in favor of this plan an excuse to hide in a cave rather than face their constituents.

I like the part where people generalize an entire age group based on the stupid comments of a few people. It makes no sense, but it's a fun way to debate.

The News is all about profiling these days, how can you avoid it?

WTF!?

Youre the one who insinuated that theyre not really cancelling meetings because of threats AND you throw quotes around it to boot. I simply said, that it could be because there is actual violence being threatened. Why not stop playing the victim card in your posts and stick with it....you think theyre full of shit, thats a fine opinion to have. YOU SAID


you used the quotes around security concerns, not me and followed up the sentence about those concerns with your 'took the ball and went home' commentary. Stand by your post for credibility sake and reiterate your point instead of spinning to and fro like a top. Just say:

"They arent really shutting down the meetings because of threats but because they dont like the feedback theyre getting" and follow it up when challenged with a, "thats right. I said it and I meant it" instead of playing your victim card, throwing up your strawman, claiming others picked something to use out of context, generalized you, misunderstood your statement, and that you sincerely are shocked about something.

Isn't it fair to guess that politicians on both sides in general get a lot of threats? If each one resulted in canceled appointments and events and what not, nothing would get done. Terrorists wouldn't even bother to bomb things--they would just send letters.

unless of course there is an organized mob mentality growing or being fomented. If anything that would be the time to lay low, let it pass, and then start the debate. Im not saying that they arent conveniently using that but I am saying it is just as likely that they are scared at some of that shit as MBBF's silly insinuations, faux neutrality and such.

Chief, "fair" is the key word you used and the answer is YES it is fair and both scenarios should be treated with equal possibility....unless of course the spinster needs to use it to boost their point or discount a counter-point. He parses polling data, leaves out truths, and links to partisan crap all while wearing a veil of neutrality and unbiased thought, and that is just nothing but Bullshit and the day he admits it will be the day where he becomes relevent again. Until then he'll always have peaked when he made the Obama/bowling 'faux-outrage' run.

I don't lean one way or another on the possibility for why such town hall meetings were canceled (either option seems as strong a possibility as the other), but my pessimism about the intentions of politicians (both sides, all sides, whatever) feeds my inclination toward the belief that this cancellation is motivated more by political considerations than security concerns.

I think that security concerns have to be rather significant and possible these days for an event to be canceled for them. The political ramifications for canceling these events is great, so it would require a very significant security threat for a politician to choose to go that route. However, canceling such events makes perfect sense within the political game, where canceling it here may hurt, but the political gain (or of political fallout) elsewhere could outgain the negative consequences of canceling the event.

excellent post!

Is it really about a huge public uprising or is it the fact that the Glenn Becks of the world are telling people to show up at these things and disrupt them? A small percent of people make a large percent of the noise. These townhalls are not filled with the average moderate middle class family. They are filled with the farthest of the left and right looking for confrontations. In the same way that I don't think the Cindy Sheehans and Code Pink of the world represent the public because they showed up in force at various events.

How is that a strawman argument? You questioned the motives for cancelling a townhall for security reasons. He showed you links to articles of violent townhalls and representatives receiving death threats.

It's probably both. One of the reasons too is that it's kind of pointless. From what I've read, the protesters scream and yell the whole time and don't let the representative talk or answer questions. You can't really have a townhall if you aren't willing to sit and listen and ask questions in a respectful manner.

Reminds me of the kid who doesn't want to hear something, plugs his ears with his fingers and screams. If you had serious concerns about your dad getting euthanized, wouldn't you want to ask your representative if it's in the bill?

Hard to ask "respectfully" of people you hold in utter & complete contempt.


Neither were a lot of voting booths that put the fence turtle in the Oval Office either.

What issue or what stance gives you the utter and complete contempt? I understand not liking spending and stuff, but what causes the compete hatred of someone else. I've yet to hear why from people.

Middle class voted for Obama (as did just about every major demographic).

A lot of folks really don't need much more than consorting with the enemy. And make no mistake, the left is the primary enemy for a lot of Americans.


And a large chunk of them didn't, nor were they the core of his support.

Enemy on what though? I mean what are the issues that make them "the enemy". This is what I'm trying to get. Is it just because it says D next to their name or are their certain issues that have turned them into your mortal enemy?

:lol:

:confused:

you're in denial

It's true the middle class (which I would define as 50K-100K) voted almost 50/50 for both candidates. I am a middle class voter that did not vote for Obama (and I didn't vote for McCain either) and I side with Obama on a lot of social issues and some economic ones. But this health care proposal is ridiculous and I don't need Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh to tell me that its a massive clusterfuck. So quit acting like there aren't middle class people out there who support the president on many ideas, hope the economy recovers, and still think his health care plan is horrible for my situation. If there weren't valid viewpoints on both sides it wouldn't be an issue.

I'm going to take that question at face value because, well, I believe that's honestly how you're asking it. But damn, it might be easier to list the issues that we aren't diametrically opposed on, would be a hell of a lot shorter list.

There's no way I could even begin to do a comprehensive list at 10p on a Saturday night & especially not with an increasingly roaring headache, so I'm going to use a little bit of a cheat sheet just to avoid overlooking even some obvious highlights.

While I know that Obama's stances & statements aren't absolute gospel for the party (and McCain's definitely weren't for that matter either), I figure this candidates-on-the-issues guide from The New York Times looks to be deep enough to at least keep me from missing most of the bigger stuff.

You phrased the question about "are there certain issues", so I'll skip the mostly obvious differences in positions and just hit the issues, I imagine the differences between general (D) positions and my own should be pretty obvious. These aren't in particular order beyond how they appear on the issues list provided with the article.

Climate change - both cause and appropriate federal gov't response
Taxation - most particularly the use of progressive taxation, but also corporate & individual tax rates under current system,
Intelligent design - if, how, when, & where it is appropriate to teach
Energy - Arctic drilling; windfall taxes on energy companies, nuclear power, ethanol subsidies,
Health Care - appropriate role of gov't in health care
Immigration - particularly amnesty but also more general areas as well
Iraq - numerous disagreements there
Gay Marriage - federal amendment, adoptions (and in general with much of the party, although noting here that Obama has not personally been a proponent of gay marriage itself)
Gun Control - proper role vs Constitutional guarantees
SCOTUS - appropriate judges worthy of appointment
Consitution - to paraphrase Obama's own words, "static vs living document"

And those are just some broad areas cribbed from key issues identified by the NYT from the last election. We could certainly add some more top-line issues such as approaches to education, church/state issues, crime & punishment, affirmative action, various bits of so-called civil rights policy & legislation, and proper use of various approaches in foreign policy.

Off the top of my head the only two areas where I don't find myself in substantial disagreement with generally (D) positions I can think of are legal access to abortion and stem-cell research and depending upon whose doing the talking for them Social Security & the importance of its solvency.

When I look at the issues, I really don't see a lot of differences between the two candidates. I also don't see that as being an "enemy". They just have different views than you. There is probably no candidate I can think of that would have the same exact views as you (nor me or anyone else for that matter).

While politics are a fun topic to debate and there are things I'd like to see in the country, I guess I don't take it as serious. Most of the issues you mentioned will have little impact on my life. I think it would make the country better or worse, but that still doesn't necessarily effect me heavily in anyway.

I guess the only thing that matters to me is progressing society so we don't get left behind. It's a global economy and global system. Staying in the same place or moving backwards on social issues isn't safe for the country and its continued dominance on the world stage.

Were you around when we talked about this a couple of years ago (IIRC)?
Don't be offended by me not remembering or anything, I just can't always recall who was in on what conversation, especially not so far back (short & even intermediate term memory is not a strong suit of mine & it's getting worse with age).

At one level, it's my liberal (no pun intended) use of the word. Comes down to definition, and by defintion that which opposes me/my interests is my "enemy".

And/But at another level


Every one of those things impacts how I perceive the quality of my life, my interest in continuing to live said life, etc etc each & every day.


But then we get to talk about what constitutes "backwards" vs "forwards" or how we personally define those things.

And it's too late in the night for that, I'm gonna go play CivRev for an hour or so to entertain my son (once he finally burns out on the 360 after endless hours per day, he thinks I'm supposed to play something so he can watch me instead of TV).

I don't know if I was or not, but that makes more sense. I use the word enemy more in the "you killed my family" sense of the word.

Maybe I'm just a more solitary guy, but I never really cared much how others lived their life. I could care less if a gay couple gets married in California. If the guy down the street smokes a joint every night after work. Or if some guy in Utah wants to build a harem of women to call his wives. I don't use how other people choose to live their lives as the basis for my happiness.

Have you tried playing him yet in a game like that? I'd love to have kids one day that would have the same gaming interests as me. I'm of the belief that some of those games like Civilization are actually good for kids.

We play Ticket To Ride from time to time, Carcassone too. Yeah, I know, it feels kind of cheesy to play card/board games on the console but I've also never had a cat scramble the board playing that way either ;)

There are some good teaching moments that come up with a lot of games but really I've found that those moments happen with a lot of things. Case in point might be that I can't even begin to tell you how many sidebar topics we've covered while watching Anthony Bourdain's No Reservations, which we both love. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much of that is me & how much of that is really him. I mean, after all, I do have a kid who watches Nick & Disney shows and picks out the commercials that are either poorly targeted or have a target that's a lot less than obvious.

Here is a primary example of why it's a very dangerous practice politically for the Democrats to start lumping people together and assuming that they are part of any 'astroturfing'. A man in Georgia asked a legitimate question concerning health care and the representative decided to fly off the handle and say that this meeting was only for the concerns of the people in his district and that he wasn't going to let the guy 'hijack' the meeting.

Two problems:

1. The guy that asked the question was a doctor and a voter in the guy's district.

2. It's obvious from the shaking heads in the audience that there were a lot of other constituents who didn't appreciate him calling out this doctor with his false assumptions concerning the doctor's motives.

This is quickly becoming something beyond health care. These comments could easily come home to roost in elections next year when their opponent notes that they were combative with their OWN voters assuming that only 'astroturfers' could be showing opposition to the bill. It's a very dangerous assumption.

Video:

11Alive.com | Atlanta, GA | Video

Article:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblo...doctor-over-h/

dola

I'm not a huge fan of the former KC mayor, Emmanuel Cleaver III, but he was smart to distance himself from the Democratic Party rhetoric that the leaders seem intent on pushing. Kudos to him. Another Democratic representative who refuses to lump into a group the people who show up for his public gatherings.

Health care issue divides Lee's Summit crowd waiting for Cleaver - Kansas City Star

Eh, it's not likely to bother David Scott's job security. He's already survived being called out for referring to his female opponents as bitches, for back taxes on his business, for funneling over a half million dollars of campaign donations to said company (a billboard & t-shirt company), and being described as one of the most corrupt members of Congress.

He also won his last election with the largest vote margin (69.9%) of any opposed Congressman in Georgia ... and that was running against a black female. The only way he's going anywhere is if he gets seen covorting with members of the GOP.

You completely sidestepped your ridiculous "strawman" post from before which is a typical MBBF tactic. Throw your shit on the wall, get called on it, and then ignore the ramifications so that the initial post hangs out there and you never have to clarify, quantify, justify, or repeal. It is no wonder you constantly have to spin, its in order to never have to face the music of your own creation.

Your "this is quickly becoming...." assumptions are so wrought with insinuation, hope, and spin that its amazing that you throw your hands up in a defensive manner and cry victim as if you dont know what youre trying to accomplish.

Here, "It is quickly becoming apparent that the Republicans cant stay in a monogamous relationship and its becoming bigger than simply that, since we all know that that certainly leads to scatological behavior and drug usage."

Prove it wrong...or simply go back and admit that there is just as likely a possibility that real violence is being threatened and that could equally be why meetings are being cancelled instead of insinuating that ALL Democratic Politicians are pussies and simply dont want to face the music.

And you cherry pick one rep. who falls in your corner and completely discount another rep who is scared from receiving a death threat even though both deserve equal weight. Nice. Well played spin master.

It sounds weird but I was one of the few kids I knew that was into the strategy games like Civilization, Sim City, etc. I really think it helped me later in life. I became real good at problem solving and math in general going through school. Having to figure out numbers for building cities or what's the odds of winning a particular battle seem silly, but they actually get the mind working. Felt it gave me an advantage over those who just sat around playing Doom.

Anymore talking points today MBBF, or do they get put out a little slower on the weekend?

What does the majority Obama-supporters post here other than "talking points"?

It just seems to me that that majority will vilify anyone who disagrees.

opinion not masquerading as news or statistics or prognostication.

Is that just the label for "anything against the majority"? Or is it possible for anyone here to post "opinion not masquerading as news or statistics or prognostication" that you disagree with?

It seems that when a non-majority opinion is expressed here, often the validity of the opinion is attacked.

no, disagreeing with me can be both an opinion or news [unlikely](generally not both as opinion is usually not news and vice versa) and is not only common opinion, but usually warranted :) . Now if someone who is newsworthy disagrees with me than that is very much newsworthy but very very unlikely to happen since Im also not newsworthy and not even on their radar.

'anything against the majority' is just ridiculous since me and MBBF and many others are sometimes in the majority on things side-by-side (take Iran for example) so that would simply be a convenient way of saying, "Since we're in the minority on this particular topic, we can just simply make shit up to prove our point [see Palin's most recent comment for a newsworthy example]." However, even in the Iran thread he found himself spinning news or veiling his opinion when his audience didnt need it.

Go back and read, starting with MBBF's post about meetings closing down and tell me what you think that was supposed to accomplish. To me, IMO, that is a veiled attempt to spin his opinion as newsworthy when instead Chief Rum, only a few posts later posts the balance brilliantly and than MBBF moves on to rinse and repeat. What are your thoughts on that trend of his?

.

This message was brought to you by Captain Hyperbole.

No, it's a label for "just post a link to hotair.com instead of regurgitating everything they say". Lets create the MBBF template.

Well this is a real bad week for the Democrats. *insert link to article being linked to on every conservative blog*

Do you believe this news? Democrats are having a rough go at it right now. *insert link to other article being linked to on every conservative blog*

Originality is what I want. It's why I like Jon's posts. He's not outraged because some blog told him to be.

Just think, if OwlGore had never invented the interwebz, compliments like that probably would almost never happen ;)

I LOVE Jon's posts eventhough I totally disagree with 99% of them and think he scares me sometimes.

Looks like Democrats are getting close to giving up power. They've resorted to bully tactics against the innocent protesters voicing their First Amendment rights. I think we can all safely assume Obama made a call to them beforehand and told them to do what needed to be done. It appears that everyone is against Obama.

Protesters Demand Apology For Fracas At Town Hall Meeting - KTVI

Tough week for the Democrats I tell you. Palin and company have figured out their plan for secret death camps for the weak. Not really sure how the Democrats planned to get this passed without people noticing. The country has spoken and decided they no longer want the Democrats in power.

Palin Paints Picture of 'Obama Death Panel' Giving Thumbs Down to Trig - Political Punch

Astroturf, strawman, Acorn, SEIU, ObamaCare, socialism, grey poupon, elitist, and daily lunch time press conference.

amidoinitrite?

A nicely written article about the recent town hall meeting protests:

Town hall protests on health care are American, too | Freep.com | Detroit Free Press

I agree, it's well within their rights to protest and they should do it if they feel so. They should do it respectfully, not shout out the speaker trying to defend his vote and act like the Family Guy Texas donkey ;)

Seriously, if these mouth-breathers actually had any ideas, we'd be rich. It's just sad when one side is running the show and all the other side can do is shout no and resort to mostly stupidity.

There's very little to respect about these vermin, and there is no defense for their support of such bullshit. They're typically saying nothing worth hearing and if some hearty souls find a way to silence them then more power to them afaic.

and yet if they were (R)'s up there talking and (D)'s shouting them down you'd be arguing for the police to be called in to forcibly remove them and saying things about how it wouldn't be the worst thing if there were some broken bones right?

Or am I not correct in thinking that would be (more or less, generally speaking) your response?

wrong, he'd be for the (R) to come from behind the podium and fight the (D). :D

I reckon that's close enough for (pardon the pun) government work. Unless of course it were the R's up there spouting utter foolishness, in which case flip it.

It's about the content, not the parenthetical tag.

Robert Reich attacks Obama's negotiations with pharmaceutical companies. I'm wondering why anyone is surprised with this kind of stuff. He promised during the campaign to negotiate with pharm companies. Just because he didn't mention that he'd negotiate to garner the pharm's support for the bill, they're now upset about it? Welcome to Washington, where concessions mean more money for everyone.

How the White House’s Deal With Big Pharma Undermines Democracy

fair enough - just doing a little "consistency check."

we can disagree on how much it's utter-foolishness I suppose.

i happen to think more than anything that it's a shame that the Republicans (largely, although not entirely) are doing this, because it's one of the first examples in a long time of Washington politicians trying to keep their districts informed and engaged in the process. Sure would be nice if it happened more often, but if it turns into a clusterfuck then I'm not optomistic that it will.

And let me clarify before I get attacked: I'm not saying that people with legitimate questions and concerns about the proposal shouldn't engage in the process and should just turn it into a rubber-stamping. I'm saying that the normal civil rules of discourse ought to apply. It shouldn't be viewed as an opportunity to shout down one's representative and harrangue them, it should be viewed as an opportunity to question them and respectfully voice agreement/disagreement.

FWIW that'd be a lot more effective too. As is, Congressmen are free to dismiss those who are opposed as "loonies" by virtue of the way they are conducting themselves, and thus not take their views into account, where if those who were opposed were civil and courteous then their opposition might stand a better chance of actually accomplishing something.

Mitch is a very good writer. Did a great job there of summarizing the situation.

See we can agree on some stuff MBBF.

You still failed to admit that violence could be the reason to shut down some town halls and instead keep the insinuation out there that the politicians involved are simply pussies, in your effort to keep spinning yesterday's info.

well done dreidel.

I'll definitely agree that the politicians should be more engaged with the voters. But I'll disagree with your point in two regards.

1. This is a sell. This is not an open dialogue where that representative will be swayed in any way.

2. When voters choose a representative, they choose that person based on who they think will make the best decisions for the voters in their district/state. The representative's job is not to go back and take a straw poll for every issue. Their job is to vote in the best interest of their voters while listening to their opinions. The Democrats knew exactly where they stood in regards to voter support of this bill long before they held their town meetings. They aren't going back to find out what their district/state thinks. They're going back to sell the bill that currently has underwheming support.

well said

valid points both. but that doesn't mean that the normal rules of civilized interaction don't apply and it should just turn into a case where you don't even give the politician a chance to make the sell. You voice disapproval before and after, not during.

I don't disagree with that. I think we have seen that toned down in some more recent demonstrations. There's always going to be occasional idiots, but over the past few days, I've seen them shouted down as well by someone usually saying 'Let them speak!'. I've also noticed people saying that on both sides of the argument, which is a good thing.

*nods*

Funny, that's exactly how I feel about these "protesters". :D

Difference being, I don't get any sense that anyone is ready to do anything drastic about them. On the other hand, I think we're getting closer & closer to seeing someone drag a congresscommie out in the street, ropes & torches in hand.

That's because they're better off ignored. They have nothing substantive to add to the debate and most of them are doing it for the attention they're getting, as well as an opportunity to vent some ill-informed anger that's been stoked by their considerably more cynical leaders.


Nah, because then they'd miss out going 4-wheelin with Skeeter and Tommy on the weekend.

Stereotyping is for self-proclaimed intellectuals too! Yay!

Out of idle curiosity, how much time do you think I've spent - sum total of all my 42+ years - on a fucking 4-wheeler?

You stereotype the people that are reaching that anger level at your own peril, because frankly once the trash in DC is taken out, local neighborhoods seem likely to be the next place where people start tidying up.

:eek:

Meant just what I said DT, at the current pace, I believe it's more likelier than not to happen not only in my lifetime but quite possibly before I get anywhere near having grandchildren.

I know this much, the number of people I know personally with a four-wheeler is less than a dozen, the number that I actually see or talk to more than once every couple of years is well below a half-dozen. The number of people I know that are business owners who are quite intrigued at the prospect of having the class warfare just go ahead & get out in the open and be settled one way or another is a significantly larger number. Some of them are likely to be lousy shots ... a good portion of them aren't.

I strongly disagree. I think there are more people who don't want what is being presented than do want it. I have not heard one person that I know in favor of it and yes that group includes democrats who voted for Obama.

My general feeling is that people are not as upset over the idea of healthcare as they are the insane growth of the government debt, red-tape, etc. that has been added in just eight months. People have had enough spending.

What I would love to see at this point is a complete six year turnover of Congress. Every American citizen votes against the incumbents presented to them. Period. We will lose some fine members of Congress who do their job but it would also send the message to the people involved that the People are still in control and if these guys don't get rid of their cranial-rectum-inversions, we'll make sure to get rid of them.

These deficit numbers are downright frightening. And we wonder why people think it's OK to run up debt on their credit cards in this country. Monkey see, monkey do........

TheHill.com - Deficit grew by $181 billion in July

And you seem to have misjudged how many of the angriest ones are bothering to go anywhere those meeting right now. Not a single person I can think of who I would put into that category would be likely to bother attending at this point.

You bet your sweet ass it is! :D


Oh lighten up, Francis. You can dish it out ("tie up all the liberals and put them at the bottom of the sea") but you can't take it. Pussy.


Maybe if I lived in Hyde Park or Evanston (or, say, Athens), I'd be worried, but I live in a pretty middle-of-the-road suburb. The revolution would have to be pretty far advanced for them to start burning down my suburb. I'll check with my next door neighbor, though, a libertarian gun aficionado with whom we're on good terms (even though he knows our politics) and see if he's planning to burn down the neighborhood (or our hedge).


Ah stereotypes. It seems I know more four-wheeler owners, personally, than you do. Also plenty of gun owners, including a sister-in-law who bags her deer quota (and my brother's) within 4 hours of the season's start every year, and then skins and butchers it herself (with the aid of a winch, I think).

Anyway, I doubt a serious armed revolt is going to happen in our lifetimes, Jon. That's not to say there won't be (and already are) parts of the country in which people with certain viewpoints (or ethnic/racial backgrounds) would be wise not to visit or live, but that's different.

It'd be a real shame if we'd have to send another General Sherman through Georgia but I'd get a good kick out of it.

This time let them go after we've burned the whole state to the ground, though.

Difference being that I'm not kidding in the slightest. You, on the other hand, strike me as empty talk big hiding behind a keyboard. Make that same crack to me standing in front of me and get away without a hospital trip and I'll make a donation to Obama's campaign.



Ain't nobody on the internet that can't be found. I know logic is a reach for most libs but consider this: why would people attack those with similar points of view in their own neighborhood? They aren't going to be working strictly locally, it wouldn't make any sense.


Yep. And anywhere within arm's reach of me is one you might want to consider very carefully.

From your mouth to God's ear, better to die fighting for something worthwhile than live through another century+ of occupation.

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

It seems like most riots these days are folks burning down the businesses in their own neighborhoods, which of course does wonders for encouraging further economic investment...

Hey, I'm all for ending the occupation of the south. But I'd just as well level the whole damn lot before I'd let you go.

occupation?? occupation?? :eek:

ohhhh...now I get it. you're one of "those."

funny, because i think there's very few people up here in the north who feel that there's anything down there in the south worth dying to try to keep at this point.

Frankly without the Christian Conservative & Religious Right movements (which have large swaths of support in the Deep South) I think we'd be better off as a country. Although I'd miss some of the fiscal responsibility brought by the old Republican party, the new GOP isn't really carrying that banner anymore.

Fact, I'll propose a deal...we'll take all the African Americans (since lord knows if we leave them with you it'll be Jim Crow all over again), and you can have all of our midwestern/northern fiscal conservatives (although we'll see how many don't emigrate when your social platforms become clear), and we'll call it even.

First of all, Reading Comprehension 101. You placed yourself in a group that's so mad "they" don't even bother to demonstrate at the town hall meetings. I was addressing the teabaggers specifically and the idea that they'd actually do something more overt than disrupting some town hall meetings. But if you want to lump yourself in with the attention-seeking teabaggers then fine, I'm addressing you.

Secondly, I type nothing on the internet I wouldn't (and haven't if given the opportunity) said in real life. In the interest of full disclosure I should say I've said nothing of this type to actual teabaggers because I haven't met any teabaggers nor gone to any town halls, and I probably won't because I view the whole exercise (town halls, in this specific instance) a waste of time.

So yes, if I actually met you in real life and we engaged in this type of conversation and your response was to take a swing at me, then there you go. I should note that I've spoken my piece to people with differing, and strongly held, views in the past, and I've not yet had to go to the hospital as a result (or sent anyone to the hospital).

Thirdly, what is it with you and 4-wheelers?


Reading comprehension fail again. I'm not saying my next door libertarian gun aficionado neighbor is going to shoot me. I'm saying that when the teabagger mob from, say, Wheaton, shows up in my suburb they'll be going through him as much as through me, but in all likelihood they'll have been to Hyde Park and Evanston (to say nothing of Glencoe, Kenilworth, Highland Park, etc...) first.


You say this, but do you mean it? I'm sure there are tons of liberal hippies in Athens you could goad into a quick hospital trip. Have you ever done it?

As for me, perhaps the most recent event I can recall was the guy in a parking lot who accused me of being unpatriotic or un-American while my brother was serving in Iraq. He backed down pretty quick when I turned around and advanced on him. All talk, just like the teabaggers.

Hey, if we do the civil war again, Idaho would be in the "north", right?

Yep!

Split it down the Mason-Dixon line as far as I'm concerned...you can throw KY and MO in with whoever they want...and fuck...I'll be generous and throw in everything east of Colorado.

You didn't know that? Didn't "The War of Northern Aggression" usage over the years provide some hint?


You don't want it anyway, a lot of us still think it's worth dying over, seems like we're well on our way to an agreement already.


Look, I know it's risky to look a gift horse in the mouth but at the risk of doing just that, could we work on something that gives you our whole little batch of self-hating liberals? You'll love 'em, a goodly number of them were yours originally anyway so at least you gotta take them back. We'll throw in duty-free shopping at Hartsfield Airport or something, maybe provide your own waiting area with express security for U.S. passport holders who are changing planes. Heck, we could even throw in Miami if we have to.

The fact that 67% of the people polled support more federal funding for education shows how out of touch people are with reality. (And I am a teacher)

Plus your poll (wonder where you get all your talking points, you joined a month ago and post only in this thread) shows that people support increasing spending everywhere. Ask those same people where the money is going to come from. Not them, tax the rich!

Sounds good. We'll take all that, and the enclave of Miami/South Beach/whatever down there that is too liberal for you also. In exchange we'll give you...hmmm...the concrete to finish building the wall across your new Mexican border at cost?