I can't support President Obama because

[Are_grits_groceries]

I don't know how!

One minute I am metaphorically carrying my "No off-shore drilling" sign. In the next minute he announces a change in policy. Wham!

My sign doesn't have a different message on the back. In addition, I am opposed to this policy change, and I would be even if my Mama suggested it. The arguments for it are specious IMHO. For my stance I will be called retarded by some WH personage.

Even people on DU will attack. They have their arguments in support of it, but I don't agree. Off with my head!

Then I hear that this is some ploy to get Rethug votes. IT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN! They have proven that they will do a 180 in a nanosecond without a care. They have flea balls and are scared to death of the Teaspitters.

Senator Corker made noises about supporting financial reform, and he got jerked back so fast he will probably wear a neck brace for years if that was the body part they were yanking.

The President should be talking to independents. If any moderate Rethug votes are left, they will hear him and decide. When he took this position, it looked like he was going for the Republican Platform and he agreed with Palin. Appearances matter.

This looks like HCR redux.

I have decided that I have to make up my mind about my core beliefs that I won't turn around on. I will not spin around like a top. If that makes me a bad Dem, then so be it. I didn't expect every campaign promise to be fulfilled, but this is ridiculous.

I'm going to read "Alice In Wonderland." The plot is easier to follow.

[secondwind]

1. I know, I know, I know....but please! just vote Dem -- won't you please?

[Are_grits_groceries]

5. I sure believe in hope and change now (and hell).

I hope to hell he changes his mind.

[femrap]

155. + 1,000

Change is becoming a :wtf: word to me.

Do you mean Good change or some kind of 'Return to the '50's' or 'Repugnant Lite' Change?

I realize that Change is the only Constant....but again...:wtf:

[goclark]

88. No vote Republican ~ Sarah would make it better

:sarcasm:

[tmyers09]

116. Not like there would be any difference.

[O is 44]

145. yeah, no difference at all. It would have helped if you

would have listened to the speech. I did and it sounded like nothing Sarah would have said. There were no slogans. I love how reactionary some always are,as if Obama could get a perfect liberal bill thru this congress.

[sabrina 1]

181. Funny, we were able to keep a ban on off-shore drilling all this time

and now, with a majority in both houses and the WH, you say we couldn't do it? Was it even an issue the Republicans would have dared to try to overturn? No, so if you're going to defend this then find some way to do it that makes some sense, please?

[TheKentuckian]

220. but the case wasn't any better because there is none

Of course he didn't sound like Palin he's not fucking stupid but he gave no real rationale for the action. What is the benefit of the policy?

[KonaKane]

180. Nice RW meme.

Got any more?

[liberation]

125. Thank goodness for the "sarcasm" tag, I thought you were proposing electoral blackmail...

Oh, wait...

[rudy23]

114. It's more like---vote Dem, or the teabaggers are gonna getcha! Which is probably why they're not

coming out too hard against the teabaggers.

[on point]

122. No. I will vote Green from now on.

[truedelphi]

167. The only nations that really and truly provide for their citizens

That avoid wars for profits, that have decent Health Care Systems in place, are nations where there are more than two sold out parties.

[pundaint]

131. I shall vote to approve of results or battles bravely fought when it comes to incumbents.

Otherwise I will vote for Change. I will no longer vote for fear. And the Supreme Court, while important, hasn't initiated nor continued any Wars, haven't sold us out to Corporations, and are blamed for actions easily corrected by a right-thinking congress.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

158. I think it is "vote Oil" or "Vote Blue Cross Blue Shield"

and its not even party except one is even worse than the other and money owns our congress

[Lerkfish]

2. kicked and recc'd

[SemiCharmedQuark]

3. It's true there was an abrupt change in policy, but it occured back in August of 2008

I remember being disappointed back then because his anti-off shore drilling stance made much more sense than his softened "we need all options" stance.

I don't think he's trying to get Republican votes, but rather Blue Dog votes.

I think this is another thing like the Afghan War that yes, he campaigned on, but I still do not agree with.

[BlooInBloo]

107. Always funny how people don't pay attention, and then blame others for their own lack.

[omega minimo]

112. The timing of the announcement is a big Fuck You

:thumbsdown:

[grahamhgreen]

130. Or FU retarded liberals

[Name removed]

175. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Egnever]

186. wow sweet post :)

thanks for that

[shellgame26]

188. +1

You know what I find ironic is that the folks who accuse us of being "cult of personality" are actually the ones who have that mindset.

It is naive to expect that you MUST absolutely agree with EVERYTHING someone says or else be COMPLETELY against them.

[RBitt]

194. the thing between your cheeks,

that's your asshole, the thing in front of you that you can toss all of your hope for change into is a hole in the ground.

[ixion]

4. Indeed... unless you have zero integrity

it makes it difficult to keep up with Obama's 180s on just about everything.

k/r

[Ichingcarpenter]

6. "Alice In Wonderland."

Alice
I wonder if I've been changed in the night? Let me think. Was I the same when I got up this morning? I almost think I can remember feeling a little different. But if I'm not the same, the next question is 'Who in the world am I?' Ah, that's the great puzzle!





The Duchess
If everybody minded their own business, the world would go around a great deal faster than it does.





The Mock Turtle
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.



Great Book... great movies... great quotes...

And Yes, that's how I look at it too!
Just saw the Tim Burton movie with Johnny Depp which I loved and
politically, sociologically and cosmically, the book, movies and the world we live in
is still a wondrous mystery.


DON'T PANIC!

I can't follow the plot either.

[Echo In Light]

7. .

[conscious evolution]

70. Is it to late for a blue pill?

[gmoney]

79. yeah, I'd like to sign up for the auto-refill on that one.

[pnorman]

63. I had no idea that there were so many videos of Alice, until I checked Amazon!

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_5?url=search-alias%3Ddvd&field-keywords=alice+in+wonderland&sprefix=alice

[NJmaverick]

8. To follow President Obama one can't use thinking that is simple enough for a sign

one needs to be able to follow complex logic and reasoning.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

9. ......

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

10. Yup you elect a brilliant Harvard Educated man you can't expect to understand him

with sound bytes or protest signs. However you can attempt to hide the lack of understanding with snark or laughter (not that it works)

[The Old Creak]

15. YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING....

Right? :yoiks:

[NJmaverick]

21. Welcome to the DEMOCRATIC Undergroun

:hi:

[The Old Creak]

26. THANKS

I'll try to keep-up:+

[Name removed]

67. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

54. .......

:rofl:

[ShortnFiery]

62. I may be a person of mere average intelligence, but I know when I'm being shafted.

President Obama is now part of the problem IF you are not a wealthy elitist who is part of "the club." Think about it? ALMOST every Legislative Initiative and/or Executive Decision favors the wealthy (banksters or corporate entities) ABOVE the welfare of the Average American.

This "he's too brilliant for your little minds to comprehend his actions" argument is running dry on me.

Unless you are part of the upper wealthy elite who can afford to "rise above the corporate scum" your life is being made MORE MISERABLE under this Obama Presidency and right-wing Democratic Leadership.

Our only option through this DARKNESS, is to force what's left of our Progressive Legislators to "take a stand." No more capitulation to their corporate democratic leaders. The foregoing will take a generation to provide fruitful but it's seemingly "our only hope."

[NJmaverick]

74. If you spent less time concentrating on who you want to HURT

like corporations, banks and the well to do and more time concentrating on HELPING people, I think you would be better off.

[ShortnFiery]

77. Perhaps that's because the dirty little secret is that we must FORCE our politicians not to

SERVE the banksters and corporations before they ID and pass legislation that PRIMARILY BENEFITS the needs of the Average hard working American.

Our illustrious democratic "leaders" when you seriously contemplate the ACTUAL BENEFITS, have been serving THEM above US.

We vote. Do we ALLOW "the status quo" or demand more?

The numbers are on our side. Further, if you don't IDentify the TRUE ENEMY of our Democratic Republic, your efforts are wasted.

Hint: The tea-baggers are not that significant.

[NJmaverick]

83. I would challenge you to go back over your posts and look at how the

over all tone is almost completely negative. It's who you want hurt, who you want to stick it to and what you don't like. So little is invested in positive visions of change and positive goals. Goals should be seeing the working class do better, rather than just trying kneecap the wealthy or corporations. Raging and lashing out isn't nearly as useful as having a vision of a better future and some idea of how to achieve it (a plan that involves more than just taking down those you don't like and expecting those actions to magically solve all the world's problems).

[ShortnFiery]

86. OMG! You're nit-picking on my TONE?!?

Newsflash: The Working Class can NOT do better when all the odds are stacked against them from birth.

My father was born in 1919 on a poor farm in South Dakota. They lived a hard life and he went to Rapid City at the age of 16 to the Civilian Conservation Corps. His family back on the farm received $20 each month and my dad kept $5 for himself.

If it wasn't for the Socialist Programs like Military Service and GI bill, our family would have stayed on that farm in abject poverty rather than moving up to the middle class. Dad was battlefield commissioned in WWII and kept it until 20 years service.

Because DAD moved up to the middle class, he was able to help ME earn my bachelor's degree. My motivation and determination help earn a Regular Army Commission in the good ole SOCIALIST US Army. After four years of AD service and selection for Captain, it was that SOCIALIST Veterans Education Program that helped me earn my masters degree and remain in "the middle class."

MY POINT: If it wasn't for the GOVERNMENT, for the public good giving our family "a step up" neither my dad or myself would have attended college and make an ENRICHED Middle Class life for our families. Sometimes I go back to "my small town" in South Dakota, population <600. Dozens of my cousins still live there from hand to mouth. It breaks my heart.

Yes, I'm emotional and saddened. My country has let the working class down in favor of the interest of the wealth elites and multi-national corporations. Hell, I'm depressed because there's no end in sight with regard to the LOOTING of our tax dollars. Next, our Social Security. :(

[NJmaverick]

87. Imagine if all the people that worked so hard to put all those great programs in place

had instead decided taking down the rich and big business was a better way to go (in other words followed your lead). You would still be stuck on a farm in poverty.

[ShortnFiery]

92. You don't get it. It was DUMB LUCK. We had to have that second GREAT WAR!

And due to SHEER LUCK and my father's good character: He found himself moving up that steep hill when he was a Staff Sergeant in Italy. He noted that artillery was falling all around him and that the other people / squads were RETREATING down the hill. Well, he didn't notice that until he was "all alone."

Dad had a choice to make at the half way point, do I continue on to the top (where the Nazis were manning a machine gun nest), or return down.

He went up the hill and he swears, NOT due to any courage on his part, he shot all three men (radio operator, a young enlisted and the gunner) within a few seconds.

DUMB LUCK my father said to his dying day. But they made him a hero ... partly also for his silence. The "write up" has the entire company supporting him and many other soldiers, especially the company grade officers, received medals ... FOR REMAINING BEHIND.

I agree with dad, although he'll always be my hero. By the previous logic, It's ALSO LUCK that some people find themselves filthy rich and continue to want to horde more money than what they can spend. It's also vile.

No, there's no solutions until we break up these large BANKS and CORPORATIONS. Until then the working classes in the nation do not have any hope of "a step up." :(

[laughingliberal]

144. +1000 nt

[ShortnFiery]

89. We have the numbers but these dirty, rotten, filthy, stinking bastards have all the MONEY ...

and POWER.

This isn't a f**king calculus problem, it's MILLIONS of people living in abject poverty and many more "in the intake" due to our leaders' plans to PUSH MORE PEOPLE down.

The only way we can change the system is elect ONLY Progressive Democratic Legislators.

I hope we can accomplish that in my lifetime, but I don't think so.

Don't worry, I'm not a quitter. :(

[NJmaverick]

90. Your plan would put the Conservatives in charge and consign the

liberals to a position of utterly powerless permanent minority. At some point one needs to be a bit more pragmatic.

[ShortnFiery]

93. Yes, continue to obfuscate rather than acknowledging "the heart of the matter."

GREED! Unbridled lust for MONEY & POWER! + MORE GREED!

Anything but help "the least of us" first before we go tear-assing around the world spreading our perverted form of neo-liberalism.

[Jakes Progress]

138. S&F This is a rabbit hole.

Trying to discuss this rationally with some here will only lead away from the subject. It is their intellectually dishonest tactic to hijack a post and change the subject because they have no chance of defending their point with real world arguments.

[speedcat]

190. I like rabbit-holes!

and I like tea. But I don't like tea-baggers. Mad hatters are OK.

[laughingliberal]

147. That would be the crux of the problem, yes

Funny how no one will acknowledge that we didn't have this kind of meltdown all those decades we kept strong regulations in place against the banksters and financial institutions.

[TheKentuckian]

111. That would be all fine and dandy but the pie is only so large

You can't help working folks without taking the big money down a few pegs. They have 90% of the resources and 1-2% of the population. That math doesn't work too well if you're hidebound to protect the wealthy.

[jeff47]

133. You're actually wrong on that front

You don't have to take big money down.

Big money makes MORE money when there's a strong middle class buying the products sold by big money. They'd actually make more money in the long run if they did more to help the poor and middle classes.

Unfortunately, the folks who have big money today are incapable of thinking beyond next quarter. That's how they got big money.

[TheKentuckian]

221. If they did more to help the poor and middle class then they'd be taken down a peg

The last 30 years conflicts with your message big time Jeff. They cut us out and have made more money than actually exists. They have made soooo much money that they can't possibly ca$h out.

You also conflict with yourself when you say they'd make more but then describe their hand to mouth greed and say that's how they got so rich. Seriously, for this to work in anything resembling beneficial for the common citizen they simply have to take a smaller cut and take more of the burden. Now, it is true that will grow the pie and so their smaller slices will become more numerous but first things first they have to accept smaller slices.

[ShortnFiery]

80. What? I've already completed the house work: mopped the kitchen floor

as well as completed a half day's worth of volunteer work earlier this week.

But thanks for your interest. :-) :hi:

[Tailormyst]

101. Dear Short and Fiery

I've greatly enjoyed watching you spar with all the Ignoreds. Based upon your responses to them, I have to think I made the right choices on who to make vanish!

Also, since your done with your floors, could you pop over and do mine next? Thx in advance !

:toast:

[ShortnFiery]

102. Thanks, you're very kind.

I have to get going in the real world and help out locally more.

It's not healthy to mix it up here so often.

Since I've made my points known, I'm going to dedicate myself to "walking the walk."

Thanks again for cheering me up. I've been admittedly depressed lately.

Best to you! :-) :hi:

[Tailormyst]

103. You too!

If the sun is out, sometimes a little time letting it shine on your face helps :) Especially after a stressful winter!

keep up the good fight!

[ooglymoogly]

121. This 10 dimensional chess meme is becoming a broken record of

of tired old shibboleths, peculiar to the sect of the Obamarama litter bearers. They just haven't looked upon the litter lately, O is no longer there. What is there, is just a pile of crap that curls the nose. O is having high 5'vs, caviar and champagne with the pugs, who are laughing all the way to their offshore, Dubai, trust accounts.

[flyarm]

137. while his wife fools the flock gardening in her $1,050.00 Jimmy Choo boots!

what fools some of these people here are..or are they?????????lol... I think not!! eom

[ooglymoogly]

209. From thousands for Jimmy Choo and Prada, to priceless designer, Founding Fathers

toilet paper...a pattern has emerged here; That our designer future is designed not for us, but for the comfort of the very few. But the folks wearing the free (handout for a vote) designer sleep masks will not see the sleek new train barreling down the tracks in a blinding bolt; A train that is not meant for us, but for the few. It will be to late when they learn there is another train in its shadow, of Pandora's boxcars full of poisonous snakes soon to be, if not already, let loose on us all. They will be easy to identify, they will come in the form of bills and signings that are far different from their propaganda of benevolence and the fine print will take your last penny and finally, the gold from your teeth and leave your children with one choice....cannon fodder.

[Raineyb]

94. Speak for your damn self. Just because you're incapable of following

doesn't mean the rest of us aren't.

The hubris of your stance is appalling.

[emilyg]

118. What's this "the rest of us"

you speak of.?

[Raineyb]

224. Those of us who don't assume we're too stupid to follow what's going on.

Or do you agree with the previous poster that we're just too fucking stupid to keep up? If you want to place yourself in that category you're certainly free to do so. I think that a good number of us (aka the rest of us I mentioned) are not so inclined to do so.

[ooglymoogly]

126. Yuh!...uh sher...do not assume our wits are as

dull as yours.

[rpannier]

171. Ah, the elitist has arrived

[sabrina 1]

184. You mean you weren't kidding? Lol!

Brilliant Harvard Educated Man! We are all just too 'retarded' to understand him! So that's what Rahm meant! :rofl:

[Ichingcarpenter]

11. Ah! Then yours wasn't a really good school.

The Mock Turtle

Ah! Then yours wasn't a really good school.
Now at ours they had at the end of the bill.
French, music, and washing -- extra.


LOL....Some don't get metaphors
because they are so Mavericky

To real cowboys, a maverick, is not a cow you want to be around
unless you have to in order to bring it back into the herd.

Angry beasties they are,
usually with a mad cow disease or senility

[NJmaverick]

14. The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Arts and Sciences

may not be Harvard but it's pretty damn close. What school did you attend????

[Are_grits_groceries]

22. I attended the school of common sense among others.

I don't care if you or President Obama attended an Ivy League School or any other great institution. I also don't care if you have postdoc work in every subject known to man. Your smugness is exactly the kind of attitude that people find so offputting. Those things don't mean you are one whit better or smarter than anybody else.

Unless and until the people who vote can follow what is going on, all the grand ideas are useless. THEY aren't stupid, but neither do a lot of them wish to get into the weeds of policy.

Combine the intelligence with something geared more towards general public. I also suggest combining intelligence with some humility. Others can bear to take that with more than a grain of salt.

[NJmaverick]

23. "Unless and until the people who vote can follow what is going on,"

People need to put in the EFFORT. Complex problems require complex solutions. Complex solutions can not be put into simple one liners for easy public consumption. That approach has been tried and failed miserably. It's time for the public to actual take the time to think and research and learn about the issues.

[Are_grits_groceries]

28. It doesn't have to be one liners.

If you think you can change the thought processes of the general public, good luck. Either President Obama adds some Joe Biden so he can connect more, then it will be lost. He can be very good at that as well if he makes the effort. He finally did on HCR in the last few weeks. People connected with his passion then and heard his message.

[ooglymoogly]

129. Look well on this propaganda hubris.

It will be the sails for the 2012 elections; To haul in 4 more years of this crock.

[barbiegeek]

52. Let's not attack anyone's intellect

[QC]

53. You might want to look again and see who started the attacks

on people's intellects.

[NJmaverick]

59. That would be post number 9 for those that are wondering

[barbiegeek]

61. I meant EVERYONE Not one person

[Are_grits_groceries]

55. I specifically said "THEY aren't stupid."

As I said, a lot of people don't want to get into the policy weeds. It may be indifference, lack of time or many other things. I don't want to demean their intelligence.

[barbiegeek]

68. I never wrote you said that. I'm just asking for polite debate on the issues

[barbiegeek]

69. I clicked the wrong reply button, for my FIRST post

I was never specifically speaking to you.

[Raineyb]

96. Forget it.

Not going to go there either.

[spoony]

58. There goes 90% of NJ's playbook, then. nt

[QC]

60. +1

[liberation]

120. Unfortunatedly, they get paid by the post....

[flyarm]

142. +10,000!!..eom

[Raineyb]

226. Someone should demand a refund. The posts they're paying for are really

too asinine to warrant paying for them.

[flyarm]

141. + 1 million!!! eom

[ShortnFiery]

72. Well put. I want political leaders, who albeit imperfect, have thoughtful SOULS.

INDIVIDUALS who truly care about those who are working for "a wage" within the working classes and those who find themselves homeless and poverty stricken ... disenfranchised within our American Communities. We can have two ongoing WARS overseas, but we can't find the funds to help our homeless off of the streets and into self-sustaining JOBS. How INSANE is that?

High IQ and a gregarious nature do not make "the perfect leader" - a sense for true empathy for "the least of us" above obscene corporate wealth MUST be a part of *a good leader's character.* Well ... IF you respect the WELFARE of "the people" above "multi-national corporate wealth."

[Ichingcarpenter]

95. And the Wealthy are growing richer

and the poor are growing poorer........


And meanwhile,

THE PLANET DIES A LITTLE MORE BECAUSE OF IT

[GameChanger]

152. Thank you for saying that.

I've been wondering if the person you are referring to is really a plant by Rahm or the DLC ???

[QC]

163. Probably not--they could afford much better. n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

30. In my High School, who I knew, met or were alumni.

Senator Wellstone, Jim Morrison's brother and sister, Eric Schmidt (google) and
cheerleader Katie" Couric among others. Public School BTW.

Then I went on to many places in the world with colleges, universities and grad school
but that will take more than a new york minute, to explain.

unless we discuss this in a Quantum extrapolation
of time and consciousness,

which, I think, might be a redundant
to some of the observers
of this experiment

[NYC_SKP]

46. Actually, some students choose Cooper over Harvard.

Both are terrific neither is better than the other.

They're two different beasts, but both at the top of the heap.

Cooper's actually been more selective, harder to get into.

http://collegeapps.about.com/od/collegerankings/tp/most-selective-colleges.01.htm

[NJmaverick]

56. about 10 windows down on the bottom is the library (which actually takes up most of the first floor)

there were comfy chairs around there a tired student could grab a nap in between classes. The other cool thing about the library was they had books that were over a 100 years old and had many of the writings of Lincoln (who spoke at the school once).

[NYC_SKP]

82. 1860, Lincoln's "Right Makes Might" speech.

Awesome library. LOL at having to use a manual typewriter back then.

Lincoln speech: http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/cooper.htm

Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruction to the Government nor of dungeons to ourselves. LET US HAVE FAITH THAT RIGHT MAKES MIGHT, AND IN THAT FAITH, LET US, TO THE END, DARE TO DO OUR DUTY AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.

:patriot:

[NJmaverick]

91. I used a Commodore 64 with a daisy wheel printer that was slower

than a good typist, by the end. Prior to that an electric typewriter and plenty of white out.

[Are_grits_groceries]

12. "complex logic and reasoning"

How clever. I am pierced to the core by your wit and sarcasm. A veritable HL Mencken, and this early in the morning too. The insight is blinding and surpasses that of the sun. Oh to aspire to such heights of sagacity and drollness. I hope you didn't hurt yourself getting down from the top of that high horse.

I read his speech and other articles. I followed his complex logic and reasoning, and it still is specious IMHO.

It says volumes that you spend your posts on cleverly written insults. I bow to that unsurpassed talent.

[NJmaverick]

13. Nothing "clever" about it. Have you even LISTENED TO or READ

the President's thoughtful and thorough explanation?

[Are_grits_groceries]

16. Obviously reading isn't your forte or

you would have noted my second paragraph in the post you answered. I read it because I did want to see what his logic was before I said anything. You insult me because I disagree.

[NJmaverick]

17. I read your post that was filled with back handed insults and little else

No indication that you had read it and if you had you did so with an OPEN MIND.

[joeybee12]

49. If you think it was thoughtful and through, I have some offshore oil leases I can sell you...

...cheap, seriously, a great deal, below market value...we have a president who knows nada about the envrionment and more and more it shows.

[NJmaverick]

57. What I have noticed is the President spent over a year studying this issue

while most of his critics have spent considerably less time studying the issue or formulating their position.

[flyarm]

151. excuse me many of us have been studying it for years and years and years ..

and many of the Florida academics,PH D's and Professors in environment are absolutely furious over Obama's one year of fake knowledge of the subject!

And they have been very vocal on our Local news about their anger and disgust!

Their sentiments are not being lost by Florida Democrats and Independent voters! Nor our very strong environmentalist activists, whom are very strong and active voters, and volunteers!

We can now kiss the very idea of a Democratic governor or a second democratic senator good bye!

Thanks Obama! and those that support this bullshit!

I guess you are happy in NJ with your new Republcan Governor ..so much so, you are doing your damnest to endow other states to your fate!!

[flyarm]

146. yeah here..every dem in my state heard it loud and clear!!

and it keeps being replayed now on our local news!!

I don't need to tell you now do I what dems are saying now in my state???????


YouTube - Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling

Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling

June 20, 2008 — Jacksonville, FL June 20, 2008

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8fkbEuCQss&feature=player_embedded

this is what Obama told Democrats and Floridians.. he told the people of Florida this June 20, 2008..while campaigning in Florida..this has run now over and over on Florida News and media..he has been proven he is a damn liar...for all Floridians to see!

Now he has done what no Republican president has..not Reagan in two terms, Not Bush 1 in 1 term and Not GW Bush in two terms..Obama has now allowed Drilling in the Atlantic Ocean 2/3rd the way down the East Coast of Florida ..and in most of the Gulf of Mexico so most of the State Of Florida could see drilling platforms be put up surrounding most of the State.

This is a Eco-system disaster!
Understand this One spill..one leak even very small could destroy the entire economy of the state of Florida!

My States economy is predicated on Tourism, Beaches, waterways for fishing, food sources..and sport.
And understand Democrats have been fighting this for decades..

This is a republican wet dream!

[tavalon]

19. Thank you

After the amazing change on DU regarding the health insurance bailout, I was worried that we were expected to just be cheerleaders no matter what stupid idea came down the pike. And this is a stupid idea.

[NJmaverick]

20. LOL! Well if you declare it's a stupid idea...

Do you have something to support your claim or are we to merely take your word for it????

[Are_grits_groceries]

24. It will take a while for any drilling and oil to be produced.

The amount of oil there is problematic and holds out hope to many that it will be considerable. I can imagine what the oil companies will do with this permission. You may trust them to be stewards of the environment, but I don't.

In addition, it has been stated that this is a ploy to get Republican votes. That in itself is no reason to overturn the ban. Also, I didn't say the idea was stupid. I said it was specious.

You made the assumption that I didn't read what he said or think about it. I disagreed with him ergo I must have not given it any serious thought. MEH!

[NJmaverick]

27. There is no need to trust anyone. There are new permissions are accompanied

by new regulations and requirements. If you had read his explanation you would have known that.

[Are_grits_groceries]

31. If you think those regulations

and requirements are going to stop what the oil companies want to do, then you believe they are changing. Corporations have shown an amazing willingness to ignore what they don't like. He would have to hit them with massive fines, and I don't think that is happening.

[NJmaverick]

35. Now you are changing your argument from "we have to trust them"

to "the regulations will not work". What specifically do you feel are the flaws in the regulations that the oil companies will exploit.

[Are_grits_groceries]

39. Why do there have to be flaws?

Corporations make up flaws out of whole cloth or just ignore what is required.

[NJmaverick]

41. Well written regulations work. It's funny I always considered that a given

among liberals. We were for regulations because they protect the people, while the right tries to argue against them by claiming they are harmful or ineffective (or whatever else they think might make their case)

[xiamiam]

64. have you ever seen the oil rigs off Santa Barbara? or smelled Long Beach?

you've got to be kidding? this is not a new idea..it is a bad idea further raping our coastlines and eco system ..you say Obama spent a year studying this...so what, I'm 60 and have spent a lifetime knowing how vile it is to put oil rigs off the coast...

[NJmaverick]

73. Ever grow up in north Jersey and refinery country?

It smells bad but until we stop using oil we don't have all that much of a choice.

[xiamiam]

78. I grew up in the Ohio River Valley.Pittsburgh..which is why I know better

[flyarm]

153. I sure as hell have ..and it sucks..when the Santa Anna's are blowing,,

and do not forget Katrina..

Where the platforms are projected in the Gulf of Mexico..is where Katrina blew through at a CAT 5 hurricane..before hitting the Gulf States where it went down to a Cat3 and did enormous damage to the oil drilling platforms off the Gulf States..am I the only one who remembers the high price of fuel that was blamed on the Oil drilling rigs being destroyed and damaged by the then a Cat 3 Katrina????????

Well when Katrina Passed me in Florida in the Gulf it was at Cat5!

A Cat 3 in the Gulf would destroy the Florida beaches , enviornment , and the economy of the entire state of Florida!

It would be an eco-system disaster! Of a magnitude we have never seen!

[spoony]

51. +1

And, for what it's worth, if someone's beliefs can't be stated relatively simply and require loads of circumlocution, that usually means they're full of loopholes and excuses rather than principles. And that's what I see when I read most of these gymnastic defenses of Obama's policies.

[NJmaverick]

71. You must have hated how many pages the HCR bill was

[jeff47]

135. Thanks for giving me someone else to ignore NJ!

Btw, my school was more restrictive than Harvard and Cooper Union. Does that mean you have to listen to me, or does that mean I'm a pretentious dick who believes a piece of sheepskin is a magic talisman to avoid having to justify my lame-ass arguments?

[spoony]

205. You're apparently not familiar with my stance on the bill

Or you'd know that it fits in perfectly with the post you just failed to make a witty rejoinder to. Think it over with your mighty, swollen brain.

[dgibby]

105. I've noticed the "intellectual superiority" meme is coming

from more than just a few of the "true believers" these days.

IMO,engaging in any type of discourse with anyone who questions one's IQ/reading comprehension, etc, because of a difference of opinion, is a waste of time, and just as futile as Obama pandering to Republicans in the interest of bipartisanship. In fact, it's more frustrating than trying to teach a pig to sing!

As a result, I have taken up a practice favored by my Quaker ancestors, and put them on "shun", bless their hearts. In other words, their arguments are not worthy of a response because they have started out from a condescending, arrogant position that has nowhere to go but down, and I refuse to wallow around in the muck.

DU is much more enjoyable since I've adopted this practice, and my blood pressure is down about a gazillion points! I don't know if this would work for anyone else, but it sure has made my life better.

[rudy23]

115. I'd argue that's a good reason to unignore--it helps to know the memes.

Of course, I TOTALLY see the pro-ignore side. Very tempting.

[dgibby]

117. I don't put them on ignore.

I just don't give them the satisfaction of taking their bait so they can impress me with their moral and intellectual superiority (not that they could). I read everything they write, even alert on some of it, but choose not to engage them, as I consider it a big waste of time, and at my age, I can't afford to lose even a nanosecond, much less the time it would take to reply.

:rofl:

[laughingliberal]

150. I notice they do seem quite impressed with their own moral & intellectual superiority nt

[dgibby]

179. I'd like to buy them for what they're worth

and sell them for what they THINK they're worth. I'd never have to worry about financial security again.

[deutsey]

32. Sounds a lot more like corporatist hucksterism to me.

:evilfrown:

[NJmaverick]

42. Is there a comfort in putting labels on everything?

[deutsey]

44. Hmmm, yeah.

Yeah, there is.

[flyarm]

154. I just spit my coffee all over the keyboard laughing ..with ..your reply!! bravo! eom

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ooglymoogly]

124. Does one indeed?...Must I read your post with a

phony English accent or just 'get" that the post itself is phony; To put it kindly: Hilariously pretentious. Do not assume our wits are as dull as yours.

[Jakes Progress]

136. Oh my sweet lord.

This is just too funny for words, too sad for comment.

[Lorien]

168. Somewhere there's a shrine with hundreds of photos and candles

you fill in the rest. :puke:

[dgibby]

177. Somewhere there's a village calling for its'

you fill in the rest!:evilgrin:

[pokercat999]

198. Yeah, he has to reason out where in the hell he going

to get $100,000,000.00 for the 2012 campaign. It isn't coming from folks out of work with mortgages that are upside down. The only place to get it is CORPORATIONS. So, with this in mind his every step is properly planned and executed.

[Fire1]

215. HAHAHA!!! True dat!! n/t

[G_j]

18. ‘I Do Not Want To See A Global Warming Bill Become A Bonanza For The Coal Industry’

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/29/sanders-on-kgl-bill /


Sanders: ‘I Do Not Want To See A Global Warming Bill Become A Bonanza For The Coal Industry’

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has expressed “deep disappointment” with the direction Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) is heading with climate legislation being crafted with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT). In a letter to Kerry, the Vermont independent praised Kerry’s “continued leadership” as a “tireless advocate for taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” However, Sanders has “serious concerns about provisions that could harm our environment and provide new federal government support for polluters”:

– State Preemption: “In my view, preempting leading states would be a huge mistake: we should definitely set a floor, but not a ceiling.”

– Support for New Nuclear Power: “If the private sector will not finance new nuclear plants, the government should not risk taxpayer dollars by stepping in.”

– Offshore Drilling: “We should not, in a global warming bill, support increased offshore drilling.”

– Coal Plant Emissions: “Global warming legislation should move us forward by requiring coal plants to meet increasingly stringent pollution standards. It should not take us backwards by exempting coal plants from this kind of regulation by grandfathering in the dirtiest plants so they can continue to operate for years to come.”

Ten other senators have challenged new support for offshore drilling in the bill. Sanders also called for several green economy initiatives to be in the legislation, including green jobs and energy efficiency funding that was included in the Kerry-Boxer climate bill that passed out of the Senate environment committee last December. That legislation limited EPA and state authority to set rules for global warming pollution, but it appears that Kerry-Graham-Lieberman could go even farther to preempt existing law with a new framework, leading Sanders to warn, “I do not want to see a global warming bill become a bonanza for the coal industry.”


..more..

[nc4bo]

25. I've had to come to the conclusion that the President and I will have to agree to disagree

on several very important things and I refuse to give up my core beliefs simply because this President has a (D) next to his name.

Nah. Can't do it. I KNOW I'm right - I feel it with every cell of my being.

I'll not back down, will not shut-up and will not stand on the sidelines and shake my head in agreement when I disagree so completely.

All that to say you do not stand alone.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Are_grits_groceries]

33. It isn't hate.

It is disagreement and bafflement. Not to be tolerated though. I rest my case.

[QC]

36. The point is how quickly and seamlessly the "facts" changed

and how the faithful accepted it without question.

Kinda like health care, offshore drilling, DADT, and pretty much every other forgotten promise Obama has made.

[Are_grits_groceries]

37. Ok. I wasn't getting it. Sorry!

I obviously can't use complex logic and reasoning as so helpfully been pointed out by others. :hi:

[QC]

40. I understand.

Thank goodness, though, that we have someone here to remind us of our intellectual shortcomings.

It helps to keep us in our place.

[Are_grits_groceries]

43. LOL! Word.

"Don't ask me to keep in step. It's hard enough to stay in line."

[deutsey]

34. I thought of this passage, too. n/t

[QC]

45. It's amazing how useful Orwell has been for understanding

the past decade in this country.

[deutsey]

48. I had always thought 1984 was a cautionary tale

In reality, it seems to have been a how-to manual for some.

[QC]

50. Yep, it's now seen more as an instruction manual, I think. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

84. Yes, it's seems REAL now more than ever.

[QC]

97. Apparently we are not allowed to quote Orwell here, though.

Amazing, isn't it?

[Starry Messenger]

109. Which is, in itself, Orwellian...

WTF?

[liberation]

123. ... and the said irony was dead, eh?

[flyarm]

159. I feel AS IF we have "MINDERS" ..now..or those who would use mind control on some that are

vunerable..or young and naive.

[The Old Creak]

38. This Explains A Lot To Me

"Too many resistance movements continue to buy into the facade of electoral politics, parliaments, constitutions, bills of rights, lobbying and the appearance of a rational economy. The levers of power have become so contaminated that the needs and voices of citizens have become irrelevant. The election of Barack Obama was yet another triumph of propaganda over substance and a skillful manipulation and betrayal of the public by the mass media. We mistook style and ethnicity – an advertising tactic pioneered by the United Colors of Benetton and Calvin Klein – for progressive politics and genuine change. We confused how we were made to feel with knowledge. But the goal, as with all brands, was to make passive consumers mistake a brand for an experience. Obama, now a global celebrity, is a brand. He had almost no experience besides two years in the senate, lacked any moral core and was sold as all things to all people. The Obama campaign was named Advertising Age’s marketer of the year for 2008 and edged out runners-up Apple and Zappos.com. Take it from the professionals. Brand Obama is a marketer’s dream. President Obama does one thing and Brand Obama gets you to believe another. This is the essence of successful advertising. You buy or do what the advertisers want because of how they can make you feel."


http://www.alternet.org/media/146005/we_stand_on_the_cusp_of_one_of_humanity%27s_most_dangerous_moments

[lonestarnot]

76. And I would believe this crap why?

[The Old Creak]

81. Because 180 Degrees

equals 180 Degrees, even for those of us unable to intellectually process all the nuance. But I do appreciate your open mind:)

[lonestarnot]

178. I bet it took you all day to come up with that response.

:eyes:

[flyarm]

161. + 1 billion! eom

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[xiamiam]

66. I'm sick of that..cheerleading versus common sense..

[lonestarnot]

75. I'm having the same dilemma

[asdjrocky]

85. Sometimes I have to wonder if he has any real convictions.

Is there anything he won't backtrack on?

[Little Star]

98. bingo

[The Old Creak]

99. I'm sure he does

its just that we have no clue what they REALLY are. Please see quote on response #38.

[QC]

100. He firmly believes that he should be the president.

Everything else, apparently, is negotiable.

[frylock]

106. to be fair, he did get that puppy

[asdjrocky]

108. Point taken.

Forgot about the puppy.

[Lorien]

169. But not from a shelter, as he originally indicated that he would

really; there appears to be NOTHING.

[obxhead]

173. yes, he even managed to fuck that up

not getting a pound dog as he said on the campaign trail. :rofl:

[liberation]

148. But weren't some people crooning about pragmatism being a good thing in politics?

Pragmatism implies at a basic level a lack of ideology, which is interesting... because ideology is one of the defining aspects of politics.

In other words, many posters in DU have actually tried to make a case that lack of conviction is not only a good thing, but a desirable quality in a politician. Anyone supporting such a stance displays a clear inability (or unwillingness) to tackle the complexity associated with advanced political thought/processes. Which is ironic, since many of those very people are the ones who are claiming that those critical of Obama on the left, are so because they can't cope with complexity. Projection, being what it is...

I was told by the Bushistas to believe Bush and not my lying eyes when I opposed every insane policy that asshole shoveled down our throats during the past decade. And now, I am being told to believe the DLC's talking point d'jour, not my lying eyes... certain things never change, do they?

[amborin]

104. another "ploy to get rethug votes" like a Heritage foundation HCR bill or tax cuts in the stimulus

bill

all of which got ZERO rethug votes

[ecstatic]

110. You can disagree with a position while still supporting the democratic president

I don't agree with the wars but I still support President Obama because he is our best option right now.

[liberation]

119. When it comes to alternatives "best" and "not as bad" are two very very very different concepts...

If the Dems want to play the "lesser of two evils" game, fine. But those embracing mediocrity should not be allowed to talk in the name of excellence.

[Xicano]

113. NAFTA, Endless War, Public Option, No Lobbyist in the White House, Off Shore Drilling, etc.

n/t

[change_notfinetuning]

127. He promised change and he's delivering - one issue after another, he's

changed his position.

[O is 44]

140. campaigning and governing are two different things n/t

[liberation]

149. Do you comprehend what you just wrote?

Do you even want to explore the places where your "logic" can ultimately lead to? Really?

[Raineyb]

225. It's as different as lying and telling the truth.

Is that really the argument you want to make? That President Obama only said things we wanted to hear to get our votes and now that he's President all promises are subject to cancellation?

Really?

[grahamhgreen]

128. If they want rethug votes, they could KILL THE PUNISHING MANDATE, and make bothe sides happy.

[jeff47]

143. Thank you for triggering what appears to now be my life's work

Which is explaining to people why there has to be a mandate. Apparently, I must do so one-at-a-time. (This is #3 today. #1 and #2 were at work this afternoon).

Insurance is a method of cost-sharing. The idea is a large group pays in, but only a small group pays out. You and dozens of other people pay your homeowner's insurance, which means someone else gets paid when their house burns down.

The HCR bill eliminates pre-existing conditions. What that means is a healthy person should wait until they arrive at the Emergency room to buy health insurance. It makes no sense to buy it while you're healthy, 'cause you can just buy it as soon as you get sick. That means no cost sharing. Which means the sick have to carry the cost burden on their own.

In the past, pre-existing conditions forced the healthy to buy insurance. Now that pre-existing conditions have been/will be eliminated, there has to be some way to get healthy people to buy insurance. Hence, the mandate. Now healthy people will buy insurance, cost sharing works, and the sick don't have to go bankrupt to stay alive.

Now, there's many forms of mandate. Personally, the mandate I prefer is the mandate to pay taxes, which then pays for a single-payer health care system. We haven't accomplished that yet, but we'll get there. In the meantime, we still need a mandate of some form.

If you can come up with a healthcare system that doesn't include some sort of mandate so that the healthy pay too, I'm all ears.

[grahamhgreen]

166. Do you have any evidence or studies to support your claim that people will

not buy insurance unless they are forced to?

How could they buy it if they are unconcious after an accident?

The biggest flaw on your argument, however, is you are conflating a tax that guarantees everyone healthcare (like Medicare), with a mandate to buy a product from private companies that have a pattern and practice of denying care to deserving customers.

They will take the trillions fom the mandate and lobby away all of the reform in the bill if it takes the next 50 years.

Simple.

[jeff47]

200. Do you have any reason that they would?

People don't buy products they don't need.

"How could they buy it if they are unconcious after an accident?"

Indigent emergency care is still required. You can buy insurance after regaining consciousness. Or someone else (such as a spouse) can buy it for you.

"The biggest flaw on your argument, however, is you are conflating a tax that guarantees everyone healthcare (like Medicare), with a mandate to buy a product from private companies that have a pattern and practice of denying care to deserving customers."

What you fail to see is both are a mandate. You are mandated to pay taxes. This is a mandate to buy insurance. Yes, the money is going to different entities, but they are both mandates.

We could have a much better form of this mandate than to pay private insurance companies, but the underlying problem still requires a mandate.

[grahamhgreen]

204. So you have NO EVIDENCE to support this major claim by mandate supporters that

will be a burdensome penalty on millions of Americans?

2) People buy products they don't need all the time - from "Sham-Wow!'s" to face-lifts. Those industries are doing just fine, thank you.

3) If you are unconscious, they still have to operate you you when you are uninsured, so there is still reason to buy insurance - so that you are covered before the procedure.

4)

mandate
n. 1) any mandatory order or requirement under statute, regulation, or by a public agency.

tax
n. a governmental assessment (charge) upon property value, transactions (transfers and sales), licenses granting a right and/or income. These include federal and state income taxes, county and city taxes on real property, state and/or local sales tax based on a percentage of each retail transaction, duties on imports from foreign countries, business licenses, federal tax (and some states' taxes) on the estates of persons who have died, taxes on large gifts and a state "use" tax in lieu of sales tax imposed on certain goods bought outside of the state.

Summary - when people are taxed to pay for health care, that care is guaranteed, when a mandate to bu private insurance is instituted, the insurers will do everything in their power to prevent you receiving the care you have already paid for. In addition, the pool of money in the mandate will be passed to the insurers in the form of profits, not to the consumers in the form of care. There is no proof that a mandate is required in order that people buy insurance - they have been buying without the mandate for centuries.

[jeff47]

211. You have NO EVIDENCE either.

That healthy people would buy insurance "just to have it". If you truly believe that people would buy unneccesary insurance just to have it, I've got some molasses flood insurance I'd like to sell you. You wouldn't want to end up like these people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Molasses_Disaster

"People buy products they don't need all the time - from "Sham-Wow!'s" to face-lifts. Those industries are doing just fine, thank you."

No, people buy those products because they have been convinced that they DO need them. Whether or not it's true is immaterial - the purchaser believes they need the product.

"If you are unconscious, they still have to operate you you when you are uninsured, so there is still reason to buy insurance - so that you are covered before the procedure."

Nope. As mentioned before, Hospitals would still be required to operate to save your life. More to the point, the initial treatment for accidents is relatively cheap. Treatment for something like cancer, or the rehab after an accident, are much more expensive. And you're fully conscious going into those.

You are also ignoring the fact that there's several ways to buy insurance for the unconscious victim, from spouses to powers of attorney.

"when a mandate to bu private insurance is instituted, the insurers will do everything in their power to prevent you receiving the care you have already paid for."

Except that they can't do that anymore. Recision and pre-existing conditions are gone/will be gone. Under what theory would they be able to drop coverage? Just 'cause they did it in the past, before the HCR bill was law?

And you know what? That would be FANTASTIC. The more the insurance industry tries to weasel out of coverage, the easier it is for us to finish the job and get single payer.

"There is no proof that a mandate is required in order that people buy insurance - they have been buying without the mandate for centuries."

This is incorrect. First, health insurance hasn't existed for centuries.

Second, you are failing to understand that things are different now. Before the HCR bill, the concept of pre-existing conditions forced healthy people to buy insurance. The HCR bill removes pre-existing conditions.

If you don't want a mandate, then explain how in the Rube Goldberg system that is the HCR bill you can get healthy people to buy insurance they don't need.

[Lorien]

172. Remove the for profit middlemen and you'll save billions

you continually manage to leave that factor out completely. It's why we spend 17% of our GDP on health insurance/ care WITHOUT covering everyone, and why other first world Nations spend 6-7% of their GDP on health care that covers EVERYONE.

Which insurance corporation do you work for?

[jeff47]

201. That's because it's not relevant to the mandate problem

The profit for insurers is irrelevant in the need for a mandate. Obviously the current mandate structure is beneficial to them, but single-payer still requires a mandate to work.

And if you'd stop hyperventilating for a moment and think about what I wrote, you'd note I favor a single-payer system that would eliminate all private insurance companies....which would be funded by a mandate.

[liberation]

176. By "explaining" you mean giving talking points?

"If you can come up with a healthcare system that doesn't include some sort of mandate so that the healthy pay too, I'm all ears."

Jeez, pick any major healthcare system in the industrialized world which is not Switzerland or Holland and there you have your example. It is not "brain surgery" I heard the googles are very easy to use these days, it seems you should focus on the basics before giving "lessons."

[Silent3]

197. Paying into the systems in France and the UK *is* mandated...

...because it's part of paying taxes.

I'd much prefer a single payer system, of course. It's a lot more efficient at collecting money from nearly everyone, making everyone but the poorest people pay into the system, even when they're young and healthy, so the money is there for the sickest who really need it. With single payer plus a more progressive tax system than we have in the US, you can also shift more of the burden for health care costs to the wealthiest citizens.

Nevertheless, the basic principle is the same with the insurance mandate for US health care. The mandate is effectively a tax, a tax that has to be paid to make sure health care costs are distributed, to alleviate the free rider problem. The insurance mandate is just an uglier, less efficient, and less progressive version of the same basic idea.

[jeff47]

203. As the sibling reply says

"any major healthcare system in the industrialized world which is not Switzerland or Holland" are ALL funded by mandates.

The form of their mandate is to pay taxes. A citizen of those countries does not have the option to not buy health insurance because it's bought with their taxes. It's the system I want here. But it's still a mandate.

[grahamhgreen]

206. Let me try to explain the difference between a tax and a mandate

A tax goes into a central government pool - this pool disperses the fund to the companies. This means that the companies have to remain responsible or they will be kicked out of the pool for good and their company dissolved.

A mandate is paid by an individual to a huge, multi-billion dollar faceless entity with no sense of responsibility to the consumer. If the company acts irresponsibly in this situation, the consumer, with little resources, dying of cancer, or sick, or whatever, has to try to take this entity to court, and will most likely fail.

By removing the mandate, or instituting single-payer as you suggest, we put the power in our hands again.

I understand your point that people are "mandated" to pay taxes, but they are different in critical ways.

[jeff47]

214. Your "explanation" indicates you don't really understand

"A tax goes into a central government pool - this pool disperses the fund to the companies"

No. When a tax funds a single-payer health care system, there is no dispersing the money to health insurance companies. The government is the only health insurance company.

"If the company acts irresponsibly in this situation, the consumer, with little resources, dying of cancer, or sick, or whatever, has to try to take this entity to court, and will most likely fail."

How, exactly, would they deny coverage now? Pre-existing conditions and recision are gone. Or is this going to be a magical "they'll come up with something"?

Which, btw, would be absolutely fantastic. The more we can get the insurance industry to try and weasel out of paying, the easier it is for us to replace them with single-payer.

"By removing the mandate, or instituting single-payer as you suggest, we put the power in our hands again."

Except as stated above, without a mandate or pre-existing conditions, health care insurance will not work. Healthy people will not buy a product they do not need and can purchase later when they do need it. If you want the mandate gone, then you have to explain why healthy people would buy insurance before they needed it.

[grahamhgreen]

216. "will not buy a product they do not need and can purchase later when they do need it."

Prove it.

People buy insurance now, when they don't need it.

The "Sham-Wow" proves that they will buy products they don't need.

If you have a crappy product - one that fails to deliver as advertised, as with insurance - people will not buy it.

If the product they are selling is good, people will buy it.



""A tax goes into a central government pool - this pool disperses the fund to the companies"

No. When a tax funds a single-payer health care system, there is no dispersing the money to health insurance companies. The government is the only health insurance company.""

You've misunderstood my statement - this will clarify - A tax goes into a central government pool - this pool disperses the fund to the HEALTH PROVIDERS.


"How, exactly, would they deny coverage now? Pre-existing conditions and recision are gone. Or is this going to be a magical "they'll come up with something"?" They already tried to deny care to children, THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING, also, rescission is in effect as they can rescind for 'fraud' which may be construed to mean failing to disclose on a form. The onus of proof is on the consumer to prove AFTER the insurance is rescinded. There are so many loopholes in this bill you could drive a truck through it.

[jeff47]

217. You've got to be kidding me.

"People buy insurance now, when they don't need it."

*sigh*

Are you really this dense, or just argumentative?

People buy insurance now when they don't need it because pre-existing conditions still exist. If you don't buy insurance when you don't need it, then you can't buy it when you do.

Pre-existing conditions go away in 2014. When that happens, healthy people have no reason to buy health insurance while they are healthy. Which is why the mandate comes in.

"The "Sham-Wow" proves that they will buy products they don't need."

No, it proves that advertising can convince some people that they need a Sham-Wow. Unless you think everyone in the country is buying Sham-Wows it is not a relevant model for health insurance. Because most of the people in the country ARE NOT buying Sham-Wows.

"If the product they are selling is good, people will buy it."

They will buy it WHEN THEY NEED IT. GSK makes very good Amoxicillin. Have you bought a bottle every month, whether you needed it or not?

"A tax goes into a central government pool - this pool disperses the fund to the HEALTH PROVIDERS."

Doesn't matter if you're making a check to Uncle Sam or Cigna, you are required to pay. Would you feel any better if you wrote the check to Uncle Sam and they wrote the check to Cigna?

"They already tried to deny care to children,"

Actually, no they didn't. One of their lawyers spouted off, and he was quickly slapped down by HHS and the insurance industry itself.

"rescission is in effect as they can rescind for 'fraud' which may be construed to mean failing to disclose on a form."

Failing to disclose what? Are you gonna try to lie about your age?

Since they can't take away your coverage for pre-existing conditions, what exactly are you going to hide from them?

And as I keep saying, "Bring it on". The more the bill fails to rein in the insurance industry, the easier for those of us still working on health care reform.

"There are so many loopholes in this bill you could drive a truck through it."

(Citation Needed)

Btw, you've completely gone off the rails here. What I keep challenging you to provide is a mechanism where healthy people will buy insurance when they don't need it, but can buy it as soon as they do, that doesn't involve a mandate.

If you hate the mandate, give me something else that will make insurance work, or quit your bitching and help us get single-payer done.

[grahamhgreen]

218. Show me one shred of evidence, or a study, that shows that people will

not buy insurance without the mandate.

ps - I have amoxicillin and roxithromycin in my refrigerator for emergencies.

[jeff47]

219. Show me one shred of evidence, or a study, that shows people

will buy insurance without the mandate nor pre-existing conditions.

Your Sham-wow example is a perfect counter-proof. Only a relatively small percentage of people buy them.

And since you keep ignoring it, I'll just keep quoting myself:
Btw, you've completely gone off the rails here. What I keep challenging you to provide is a mechanism where healthy people will buy insurance when they don't need it, but can buy it as soon as they do, that doesn't involve a mandate.

If you hate the mandate, give me something else that will make insurance work, or quit your bitching and help us get single-payer done.

[grahamhgreen]

223. But the idea is to allow big insurance to fail, not to fix their corrupt and failing system

The problem with big insurance is that they take the profits and use the money to fight against reform and fail to pay out claims to deserving customers.

see: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:k2pZl0sNatwJ:hcfan.3cdn.net/578b1f7456962bfa7a_r6m6bhcjn.pdf+health+insurance+profits+statistics&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESh56pwmgB8l5InQ2t3oc7xLJEKE_v3HcGcpjJCFRUUVoHvN6YTCn6HsoZB-XIB7BDtzTUy3op8sk6yRKSvOOFylzqT7CYnyUNhj_f0IcKrGMcOH5CF8C1c4sVZeG1T1b3E4dYGK&sig=AHIEtbSW2Ts_zshh87DW8WRvqIlk4XlaFA

If you want single-payer, please hep us to kill the punishing mandate. By mandating big insurance trillions, you will be giving them trillions to lobby against reform.

What is the worst thing that can happen when we remove the mandate - the corrupt big insurers go belly up, then we institute single payer.

This is a bipartisan issue - both sides dislike the mandate - it's a win for Obama and the party.

A tax for a single payer system, which does not deny claims to increase profits and CEO pay, is not the same as a mandate to purchase a product from a corrupt entity who is continually conniving to deny lawful claims and corrupt our health care system.

There is no proof that it is needed for the new laws to function, it WILL crate a financial burden on tens of millions of Americans - some of them crushing - and it WILL NOT reduce costs.

[jeff47]

228. Can't get there from here right now.

"If you want single-payer, please hep us to kill the punishing mandate."

No. Because I want a mandate. As I keep pointing out, single-payer is still a mandate. If we work to destroy this mandate, you make it MUCH harder to implement the next one because all the same arguments still apply. The plan™ involves having everyone gradually buy-in to Medicare in order to satisfy the mandate. Whether it's an explicit or de-facto single-payer, I really don't care.

"What is the worst thing that can happen when we remove the mandate"

The entire health insurance industry collapses suddenly, and for a few years everyone is left to fend for themselves while the politicians bicker and the Republicans filibuster. Millions die. The overall economy is devastated by the sudden shock of insurance companies not only becoming worthless, but their fire-sale liquidation of all their assets. Since insurance assets are usually spent on investments, their sudden disappearance destroys everyone's 401k just when they need to pull out their retirement money to pay for health care. In the meantime, lots of hospitals and doctors go bankrupt attempting to heal all the people who can't pay.

Or, we do it more gradually. Mandate goes in, and we make it so a Medicare buy-in satisfies the mandate. Basic economics says that Medicare buy-in should be cheaper than for-profit insurance. Everyone gradually shifts to Medicare, and health insurance companies slowly wither away.

Our for-profit health insurance system took about 100 years to establish itself. It will take some time to dismantle.

"This is a bipartisan issue - both sides dislike the mandate"

The problem with your logic is both parties DO NOT like single-payer. The conservatives hate the mandate, but they hate single-payer even more. That makes it not a bipartisan winner.

"There is no proof that it is needed for the new laws to function"

Yes, there is. You just keep spouting "NO PROOF!!!!1!!1!!eleven" because you don't want to face it. People do not buy products they do not think they need. For example, you have refused to purchase the molasses flood insurance I generously offered in another post. Perhaps you could supply your volumes of evidence that healthy people will still buy health insurance when there's no mandate nor pre-existing conditions? Ya know, the thing I've been asking for for the last 5 or so replies?

"it WILL crate a financial burden on tens of millions of Americans"

Hence, subsidies. And that burden makes for excellent leverage to move the process to it's logical conclusion.

"and it WILL NOT reduce costs."

And there's where you don't seem to understand the basic economics of insurance. Larger pool = lower costs. Mandate = larger pool. Now, it is quite possible that the insurance companies will not pass those lower costs on to consumers, but that's why we're also eliminating their anti-trust exemption (waiting on Senate vote) and creating a framework for them to compete against each other (aka exchanges).

'Cause if a mandate actually didn't reduce costs, then a single-payer system wouldn't reduce costs. We know that single-payer is cheaper than for-profit, because we're paying so much more than everyone else on the planet. Why? Mandate. Everyone's in the pool, and that huge pool drives down costs.

[MadLinguist]

132. Curiouser and Curiouser, it does get since going down this hole.

I'd say Alice's adventures through the looking glass are about as good a guide to making sense of what goes on the theater of DC as anything that passes for public discourse on the matter. At best, we get the Duchess:
Tut, tut, child! Everything's got a moral, if only you can find it.

[flyarm]

134. Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling -Jacksonville, FL June 20, 2008

YouTube - Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling

Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling

June 20, 2008 — Jacksonville, FL June 20, 2008

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8fkbEuCQss&feature=player_embedded

this is what he told the people of Florida in June 2008..while campaigning..this has run now over and over on SW Florida News and media..he has been proven he is a damn liar.for all Floridians to see!

Now he has done what no Republican president has..not Reagan in two terms, Not Bush 1 in 1 term and Not GW Bush in two terms..Obama is now allowing Drilling in the Atlantic Ocean 2/3rd the way down the East Coast of Florida In the Atlantic Ocean ..and in most of the Gulf of Mexico so most of the State Of Florida could see drilling platforms be put up surrounding 2/3rds of the State.

This is a Eco-system disaster!
Understand this One spill..one leak even very small could destroy the entire economy of the state of Florida!

My States economy is predicated on Tourism, Beaches, waterways for fishing...for food sources...and sport.
And please understand Democrats have been fighting this for decades..decadessssss!

This is a republican party wet dream!

[Fla_Democrat]

139. Don't use poster board

use an etch-a-sketch :evilgrin:

[inna]

156. Wonderful (very Alice-in-Wonderlandish) post!

:applause:

me likey

[HuckleB]

157. I guess I'm just weird.

I know that politicians are going to do things with which I don't agree.

[hfojvt]

160. thank goodness you are advocating for your core beliefs

instead of attacking Democrats.

Let me see if I understand your core beliefs

1. I am never wrong
2. I never change my mind
3. I never compromise
4. I hate Obama

Does that sum them up?

[maryf]

164. Lets see which category your post fits under...

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation // = check

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
2. Become incredulous and indignant//
3. Create rumor mongers
4. Use a straw man
5. Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule//
6. Hit and Run//
7. Question motives//
8. Invoke authority
9. Play Dumb///
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
12. Enigmas have no solution
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
14. Demand complete solutions
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions//
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
17. Change the subject//
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad//
19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
20. False evidence//
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
22. Manufacture a new truth///
23. Create bigger distractions
24. Silence critics
25. Vanish

Thanks to a former du'r whose posts were too truthful...

[hfojvt]

208. such a handy little all purpose attack list

Seems to me like you could check your own post on a few of those

5. Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule//

6. Hit and Run//
7. Question motives//

In case you missed it, I have not run, although I will be making a road trip in about an hour. My post is no more of a hit and run than yours, and if I questioned the motives of the OP, which stated "I cannot support Obama" right from the start, then you seem to have questioned my motives as well.

Actually, I am assuming the OP and I are on the same side, and I am questioning his TACTICS, rather than his motives. As I also said yesterday
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/127

"Look, I share a desire to move both Obama and the Democratic Party to the left. I really do, but I don't think a strategy of constantly castigating them for not being progressive enough is a way to accomplish that. I think that if people came to DU and got information, they might walk away thinking "wow, single payer really is better" or "wow, Reaganomics really does suck (if I may put forward my own not so humble attempts in this regard http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/126 ). Instead they walk away thinking things like "wow, Obama and Democrats really do suck (thus why bother electing them)" or "wow, liberals really are arrogant and hateful". It seems to me we are our own worst enemy in moving the country in the right direction."

Is somebody reading this OP and learning something like "Obama is wrong to support off-shore oil drilling" or are they just reading the OP and learning something like "Obama sucks" meaning "I am gonna support Nader in 2012 so we can get another George W. Bush")

[maryf]

210. It is handy, and I am guilty as charged.

I wasn't talking about the OP, I was referring to your post above mine...Its a good list to use as a mirror for others and for our own selves as well...We are all human!

[liberation]

165. So many strawmen...

did you get the proper cert from the fire department?

[inna]

182. LOL, what a ridiculous personal attack/massive fail of a post at the same time!

See #164, that about sums it up for you.

"Let me see if I understand your core beliefs"

Fucking pathetic. :puke:

[hfojvt]

207. it's communication

I paraphrased the OP

Post 164 might be a handy-dandy list to attack what somebody has said without responding to the substance.

You perhaps think that my own post had no substance either.

However, the first three points seem to come from this

"I have decided that I have to make up my mind about my core beliefs that I won't turn around on. I will not spin around like a top."

Isn't that a statement that says "I am never wrong. I never change my mind. I never compromise."? It looks that way to me.

And as for the fourth one, that comes from the title "I cannot support Obama" and also "I didn't expect every campaign promise to be fulfilled, but this is ridiculous."

I read this OP, which made the greatest page with over 100 (or is it 200 now?) votes as a perfect example of what I was complaining about earlier
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/127

Like many people in this country, if not most, I a) don't have very strong opinions about off-shore oil drilling and b) don't really know that much about it in order to make up my mind either pro or con.

The OP, and perhaps yourself and my other detractors, perhaps have more knowledge on this issue and the outrage is justified. But I would find the whole exercise more productive and more persuasive if the knowledge was shared. Instead only the outrage is shared. A large group of DUers seem to prefer the shared outrage though. In fact, they vote that it is 'great' amd are only too happy to jump on the outrage express "fark yes, Obama farking sucks!!"

[hulka38]

162. You're a good Dem.

[Dr.Phool]

170. I can't support him anymore, because he's a stealth Republican.

He got elected as a Democrat, so he could implement Republican policies.

I hope Howard Dean or Kucinich primary him in 2012.

WE DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN!

[Egnever]

187. LOL

you folks are comical

[gleaner]

174. A very good post ..

You make your position very clear, and that is refreshing. I have not supported Obama since he did his 360 on HCR, and the final product is even worse than I thought it would be. As a Californian I find the idea of offshore drilling, anywhere, unthinkable.

I remember too well what happened here in the 60s when they were drilling on a large scale off of our coast. There were constant leaks and spills which claimed pristine beaches and killed sea life and in some cases corrupted a fragile ecology which can never be restored. We have a state park built around a beach, Carpinteria, if you are familiar with California. It still has a drilling platform offshore because the lease to drill there was for 99 years and the courts would not break existing leases. If you go to that beach you have to take acetone and rags to clean the oil glops off of your feet before you can get back into your shoes. You cannot avoid them. They range from tiny to fist sized. I don't know how it is maintained now because with MS I cannot walk the beach anymore but it was beautiful. It is behind the Channel Islands reef, and you could find a whole range of shells and observe Seals and Sea Lions not too far from shore. There was a plethora of sea birds, but you could not get away from the oil. Many of the shells were stained. Sometimes you would see a bird with some of it matted in its feathers still able to get around but only with difficulty.

Santa Barbara, another beautiful area was very nearly destroyed by a big oil spill years back, and the fact that the people there had money was probably one of the factors in Bush senior declaring his moratorium on offshore drilling.

Rhis is a long way of saying that a lot of Californians and Oregonians will probably be trying very hard to keep this from happening. It isn't just the east coast, it is places full of treasures which belong to the whole country which must not be lost. If anyone still thinks Obama is a Jedi Warrior or a Chess Master with some kind of secret plan that renders the bad things he has done, is doing and will continue to do as some kind of magical master plan, they need to think again. He is only a politician and not a very good one. He is a politician who stomped on his base and now seems to be actively attempting to destroy everything of real value in this country. Some things can't be purchased. They came to us in nature as a trust to preserve not to destroy for a fraction of a percent of fossil fuel that according to Keith Olbermann would not meet our petroleum usage for even two weeks.

I fully expect to get my proper attacks for this. I do every time I disagree with Obama let alone criticize him, but I'll live and as I keep saying, the attacks reflect more on the people that make them than they do on me.

[laughingliberal]

183. K & R nt

[skeptical cynic]

185. There's a lot of nastiness in this thread, so I'm just going to

drop in long enough to agree with the Op. I can't figure out what Obama is doing either, and it isn't for lack of intellect or higher education, or lack of skill playing chess, go, or tic-tac-toe.

I think Obama's decisions do reflect complexity, and complexity with a discernible pattern--a corporatist pattern. Offshore drilling is a huge concession to Big Oil, one they've been pursuing for many years, and it was "New Democrat" like many of those defending the wealthy in this thread, and like the one that handed deregulation and free markets to the corporations in the 90s, that handed it over to them.

Today was a good day for Big Oil.

[speedcat]

189. smokescreen?

I'm not sure I want to get so riled up about this Virginia drilling bit. Not sure WTF the Administration is thinking, but possibly this is just a distraction so they can get away with some real work. :) think positive!

[ChicagoSuz219]

191. If you had listened better, you would've heard him talk about this before...

...and wouldn't be so shocked now.

[Sherman A1]

192. +1, Agreed & Well Said!

[upi402]

193. no opposition party

no shit it's discouraging

[wial]

195. I know how elliptical this is going to sound but

I've been wondering if he's trying to co-opt the issue in order to put it to sleep -- this is something the GOP almost has to support, and yet they're so unequivocally opposed to him at the moment they can't even on this, which means he can say "hey, I wanted to let you have this one, but you didn't seem interested, so I guess we won't be doing it now." GOP would look pretty silly putting the issue forward themselves after failing to support the president's initiative. He's letting them hang themselves on their own obstructionist rope. Introducing them to the unwanted consequences of their own unbalanced assumptions -- the essence of Tibetan debate and yoga and all martial arts.

I know the 3 D chess meme wears thin, but whatever I think about him he just seems too smart to actually cave in on something like this. What chance does it have of passing without GOP support?

[northernlights]

196. he is too tight with the elite thugs.

Read the Robert Reich thread on the Fed. Read Obama's family connections with Geithner. We were scammed. Again.

[austin78704]

199. Reading thorugh the replies

I see the same handfull of posters accusing some dems of being left enough to fall into a wormhole and pop out in the middle of the teabaggers' rally. And those posters have written a LOT of messages with that same meme in this thread and countless others. Watching others try and reason with them is reminiscent of watching creationists and evolutionists argue the veracity of the bible--lots of heat and fury, no progress.

I'm all for legitimate arguing to hash out what will be the best solution to a problem, but the bullshit of using "teabagger" as a pejorative against anyone who fails to agree with every little thing you say needs to stop if we're going to make any progress at all.

We have a vocal minority--killfile them and carry on with the real discussion. Don't fall for the trolling.

[BailoutBill]

202. I can't support

massive military spending and bank bailouts.

Any Pol that does is off my list.

[BlueIris]

212. Well put. nt

[Raine]

213. On point

TOTALLY! :thumbsup:

[Indi Guy]

222. I Can't Support Obama Because...

...although I know he's a decent & honest man, no president of the USA has been less than a figurehead for the deep money for a very long time.

[treestar]

227. Black and white thinking

Either/or. There's no President you can ever support, then.