Obama General Discussion - Page 28 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-01-2010, 11:02 AM   #406
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Now, I though they were just the party of "NO."


maybe "NO" and "tort reform" ... but that's about it.


Quote:
Mr. Obama, in his State of the Union address last week, noted that after generations of failure, Congress is closer than ever to adopting legislation that would achieve the health care goal of his predecessors.

“If anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses, let me know,” Mr. Obama said.

The House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, raised his left hand high in the air.

Two days later, Mr. Boehner and his caucus challenged Mr. Obama during the televised question-and-answer session. With dramatic flair, they presented him with a book of Republican “solutions,” including a chapter on health care.

But the debate has raged for so long that there was not much new for Mr. Obama to contemplate.


For instance, a core component of the House Republicans’ alternate health care measure — to create so-called association health plans — was also proposed in 2005 in response to Mr. Bush’s speech.

House Republicans, who controlled the majority at the time, approved the bill only to see it die in the Senate, where Republicans were also in charge. The proposal, disliked by Democrats, was also sharply criticized by conservatives as an intrusion by the federal government in health care.

Mr. Obama, in an exchange Friday with Representative Tom Price, Republican of Georgia, said he had considered many Republican ideas and pointed, by example, to a proposal to allow insurance companies to sell policies across state lines.

“We actually include that as part of our approach,” the president said. “But the caveat is, we’ve got to do so with some minimum standards; because otherwise what happens is that you could have insurance companies circumvent a whole bunch of state regulations.”

After the session, Representative John Shadegg, Republican of Arizona, took issue with Mr. Obama’s comments, saying the president “got his facts wrong.”

“He insisted that his health care reform proposal would allow Americans to purchase insurance across state lines,” Mr. Shadegg said. “In reality, his bill nationalizes federal insurance regulation and gives the average American family no relief from expensive mandates that drive up the cost of health insurance.”

But in a report comparing the health care bills passed by House and Senate Democrats, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service wrote: “Both bills would allow states to form compacts to facilitate the sale and purchase of health plans across state lines.”

Mr. Shadegg, a supporter of state high-risk insurance pools, also denounced as insufficient a provision in the Democrats’ legislation to temporarily expand high-risk pools until new rules take effect barring insurers from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

“The provision is nothing but a fancy window dressing to make a highly-partisan government-takeover of health care appear palatable,” Mr. Shadegg said. “Well, the curtain has been pulled back and the truth is exposed!” But while the Democrats’ proposal may differ from his own, the idea has been chewed over extensively by lawmakers in both parties.

On a number of points, Republicans and Democrats are closer to agreement than many people realize.

A Deep Divide Separated by Plenty of Common Ground - Prescriptions Blog - NYTimes.com


when will Republicans end their jihad on Mr. Obama and actually put the needs of the American people first?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-01-2010, 12:19 PM   #407
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
 
UberBeaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: the most serious...douch hammer ever
Posts: 20,318
Local Time: 04:18 PM
"With dramatic flair, they presented him with a book of Republican “solutions,” including a chapter on health care."

I bet the book was called, "The Bible".
__________________

__________________
UberBeaver is offline  
Old 02-01-2010, 02:27 PM   #408
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 04:18 PM
i'm awaiting INDY to stand up and applaud the President's nuclear power initiatives.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-01-2010, 02:29 PM   #409
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:18 PM
It's just a diversion.

Obama still hasn't produced his live-birth certificate.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-01-2010, 06:21 PM   #410
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 03:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i'm awaiting INDY to stand up and applaud the President's nuclear power initiatives.
Didn't get to watch the session but if the president is now supporting nuclear power I'll add it to the, small, yet existent list of things I applaud the president for.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 02-01-2010, 06:52 PM   #411
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Didn't get to watch the session but if the president is now supporting nuclear power I'll add it to the, small, yet existent list of things I applaud the president for.


what's remarkable, is that the President is able to understand nuclear power not as an all-saving technology like you do -- probably just to anger the liberals who remember 3 Mile Island all too well -- but that it's one piece of a comprehensive energy independence strategy that places equal importance on green technologies and supertrains.

Obama's nuclear loan guarantees draw broad opposition - Green House - USATODAY.com

of course, this requires a whole lot more socialism.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-01-2010, 08:16 PM   #412
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
Might that reflect the pressure from consumers over $4/gallon gasoline prices after a long stretch of stable low prices? I believe prior to that Bush was sensitive to the claim that he was a tool of Big Oil. As for Bush criticizing Kerry, that was pure politics taking advantage of his brother being governor of Florida and yea, asinine considering how the decade played out.
It certainly did. People were upset about gas prices starting around 02/03, but there was no massive outcry for offshore drilling until after prices actually started declining in summer 2008. That was my point. Bush's response to the outcry was what determined the chain e mail content, not the other way around. Point remains, it was not an immediate solution to high gas prices, as was sold. I have a problem not with drilling, but how it was sold by Republicans.


Quote:
Not accurate, new technology is mapping before unknown reserves all the time and we are now able to tap old reserves with better equipment to draw out oil unobtainable a generation ago. 82% of the the world's known reserves of oil and gas have yet to be used. Someone born today will not live to see a world without oil or gas reserves. Not to mention shale and coal.
Is offshore drilling a viable solution to energy needs - MarketWatch

EIA - Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf
US Govt Sponsored Peak Oil Report Draws Disturbing Conclusions - Commodities - Resource Investor

I don't know where you get your information, but here are the most objective non biased sources on the subject. Yes, we have new equipment and technology, that does not change the amount of oil that is in the OCS. The outdated estimates are of 18 billion barrels of oil, and that will probably be less when the new review is completed.

Insignificant amount; quick question: Who thinks adding under 100,000 barrels a day in supply sometime after 2020(the barrels per day that 18 billion breaks down to) -- some one-thousandth of total supply -- would be more than the proverbial drop in the ocean? Remember the Saudis couldn't stop prices from rising now by announcing that they will add 500,000 barrels of oil a day by the end of this year!

This does not change the fact that oil companies, despite record high prices, will not shell out billions unless they have some damn good idea of the actual yield from doing so. This is why many offshore areas that were not banned
in 2005-08 remained untapped by oil companies, the cost was too high and the benefit too uncertain.

Again, I have no particular opposition to offshore drilling, but Bush and McCain in 2008 sold it as a reasonable response to immediate high gas prices, which is just not true any way you slice it.

I would like to know where the increased commitment is to piping in natural gas to the lower 48 from Alaska? Where the commitment is to drilling the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, or where is the commitment is to making oil companies drill on the interior land they already own that we know for a fact has oil? All of this is less costly and has more of an infrastructure in place than does offshore drilling in the outer continental shelf.

Yes, 82% according to NASA remains untapped, but most of that is off shore, far offshore and extremely deep. Most of it is not subject to any kind of legislative or executive ban, so its not crazy environmentalist socialists holding it up. Is it logical to get this? Is it cost effective for private industry? Absolutely not. Otherwise, they would already be in there getting that oil. That is why NASA is a government agency of the same government that, under GW Bush said peak oil was a reality and had to be addressed.

Of course, we will never see a world without oil. I am well aware of this. I don't know anyone who disputes that. What people dispute is that you can turn on a spigot hooked up to a hose from the Atlantic right into Miami and send it to every refinery in America starting tonight. They are right. They also dispute the claims that "domestic oil is national security" as oil is a global market, and oil companies, having no particular patriotic concerns, or any concerns outside of the bottom line, will sell it wherever they can make the most profit. Rightfully so, that's the market, that's capitalism and I don't oppose it.

Quote:
Those "On the right track" polls in the 2nd term of Bush that were so low also included the frustration of fiscal conservatives. You can see that reflected in the Republicans losing the Congress in 06 and the White House in 08.
Of course, what is your point? I was saying that elected Republicans and their chain e mail sending supporters said nothing that I heard about deficits and debt until Obama took office.

So these people can not logically line up with the fiscally conservative frustration at Bush.

You can also see the Republicans have not changed their fiscally irresponsible ways one bit in 2009/2010. They still won't agree to pay as you go, any new revenue, still want across the board tax cuts and are still promising spending on popular programs.(See Scott Brown)
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 02-01-2010, 08:31 PM   #413
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
what's remarkable, is that the President is able to understand nuclear power not as an all-saving technology like you do -- probably just to anger the liberals who remember 3 Mile Island all too well -- but that it's one piece of a comprehensive energy independence strategy that places equal importance on green technologies and supertrains.

Obama's nuclear loan guarantees draw broad opposition - Green House - USATODAY.com

of course, this requires a whole lot more socialism.
Now supporting nuclear power?

Obama has always supported nuclear power, nothing new.

This brings up some of the same concerns as offshore oil.

It should remind us, as Irvine pointed out, that private industry incurs significant, significant costs in delivering these energy resources and for that reason, it is not realistic to expect that dozens of nuclear power plants will be on line soon.

Will the government loans be enough to get the industry moving? Hopefully, its carbon free energy and a lot of it at that. However, it is far from certain as the plants go for $10 billion per pop and have been marked by cost overruns and project abandonments in the past.

Will it work? Here's to hoping, but its not without its costs to taxpayers.

Shock of shocks, INDY supports a government role in shaping national policy!! See how it can work to our benefit? Private industry is not willing to take such a big unsubsidized risk, so the government helps out since its in our interest to be energy independent!

This is all Democrats are talking about when speaking of a government role. Nothing to fear Indy.
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 02-01-2010, 10:54 PM   #414
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,881
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Republicans piss me off on a local level, too. Our school board got overrun by (borderline retarded) Republicans in this last election, and their first major move was to vote down research on an ordinance that would install lights on our one high school's football field, on the basis that it "could cost $400,000." And every Republican in the whole fucking town is going "They're being fiscally conservative! They're keeping campaign promises! We're heading in the right direction, I just wish Washington would act this way!"

Hold on, they didn't vote down $400,000 lights. They voted against finding out how much it would cost. They just fucking guessed how much it would cost. One of the democratic members projected that it could be done for as little as $40,000, but everyone ignored that. They won't even find out how much it costs, because they needed to act like they're being really fiscally conservative.

I feel for my siblings, who are going to have everything good about our schools stripped away in the next couple of years by idiot Republicans. They're already proposing lowering the staff count and cutting class levels, as well as some extra-curriculars.

/rant
__________________
PhilsFan is online now  
Old 02-01-2010, 11:05 PM   #415
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 04:18 PM
the irony, of course, is that being fiscally conservative isn't the way to grow an economy that has been in recession and has an unemployment rate of 10+%.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-01-2010, 11:11 PM   #416
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,881
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Yeah, but the president isn't Republican, so you have to be fiscally conservative now.

That Obama-Republicans forum is great theater. He's kicking their ass (I'm 15 minutes in).

25 minutes till Fox panics and cuts the feed.
__________________
PhilsFan is online now  
Old 02-01-2010, 11:59 PM   #417
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,881
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
If you were to listen to the debate, and frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you'd think that this thing was some Bolshevick plot. That's how you guys presented it. I'm thinking to myself, 'How is it that a plan that is pretty centrist ...'- no, look, I know you guys disagree, but if you look at the facts of this bill, most independent observers would say that this is actually what many Republicans proposed to Bill Clinton when he was doing his debate on health care.

We've got to close the gap between the rhetoric and reality. I'm not suggesting that we're going to agree on everything, whether it's on energy or health care or what have you. But if the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don't have room to negotiate with me. I mean, the fact of the matter is that many of you, if you voted with the administration on something, are politically vulnerable in your own base, in your own party. You've given yourselves very little room to work in a bipartisan fashion, because what you've been telling your constituents is, "This guy's doing all kinds of crazy stuff that's going to destroy America."
Game. Set. Match. See you guys next season.

This is why I supported this man for president.
__________________
PhilsFan is online now  
Old 02-02-2010, 01:06 PM   #418
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Huffington Post

A new poll of more than 2,000 self-identified Republican voters illustrates the incredible paranoia enveloping the party and the intense pressure drawing lawmakers further and further away from political moderation.

The numbers speak for themselves -- a large portion of GOP voters think that President Obama is racist, socialist or a non-US citizen -- though, when considering them, it is important to note that a disproportionate percentage of respondents are from GOP strongholds in the South (42 percent) as opposed to the Northeast (11 percent). Also note that this is a poll of self-identified Republicans, which means that independent Tea Party types are not included.

Nevertheless here are some of the standout figures as provided by Daily Kos/Research 2000:

* 39 percent of Republicans believe Obama should be impeached, 29 percent are not sure, 32 percent said he should not be voted out of office.

* 36 percent of Republicans believe Obama was not born in the United States, 22 percent are not sure, 42 percent think he is a natural citizen.

* 31 percent of Republicans believe Obama is a "Racist who hates White people" -- the description once adopted by Fox News's Glenn Beck. 33 percent were not sure, and 36 percent said he was not a racist.

* 63 percent of Republicans think Obama is a socialist, 16 percent are not sure, 21 percent say he is not

* 24 percent of Republicans believe Obama wants "the terrorists to win," 33 percent aren't sure, 43 percent said he did not want the terrorist to win.

* 21 percent of Republicans believe ACORN stole the 2008 election, 55 percent are not sure, 24 percent said the community organizing group did not steal the election.

* 23 percent of Republicans believe that their state should secede from the United States, 19 percent aren't sure, 58 percent said no.

* 53 percent of Republicans said they believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president than Obama.

During his appearance at the House Republican retreat last Friday, Obama explained that it was hard to forge bipartisan consensus when lawmakers were trashing his health care bill as a "Bolshevik plot". These poll numbers show that the gulf preventing bipartisan consensus extends well beyond health care. How does a Republican lawmaker explain to his or her die-hard base that it is important to work on legislation with a racist, socialist president who is illegally holding office only because of the help of ACORN?

"This is why it's becoming impossible for elected Republicans to work with Democrats to improve our country," said Markos Moulitsas, founder and publisher of Daily Kos. "They are a party beholden to conspiracy theorists who don't even believe Obama was born in the United States, and already want to impeach him despite a glaring lack of scandal or wrongdoing. They think Obama is racist against white people and the second coming of Lenin. And if any of them stray and decide to do the right thing and try to work in a bipartisan fashion, they suffer primaries and attacks. Given what their base demands -- and this poll illustrates them perfectly -- it's no wonder the GOP is the party of no."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-02-2010, 01:25 PM   #419
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,881
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
* 53 percent of Republicans said they believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president than Obama.
Dear Christ.

At least, you know, pick someone you could fucking make an argument for. This is just batshit insanity.
__________________
PhilsFan is online now  
Old 02-03-2010, 05:40 PM   #420
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Dear Christ.

At least, you know, pick someone you could fucking make an argument for. This is just batshit insanity.
Exactly.

Anyone who has ever watched Sarah Palin being interviewed or talking without a script or read anything she has written can tell she is a completely insane nutjob who does not have the 1st clue about anything.

Many Republicans I know were embarrassed by her from day 1.

Whatever, it shows a hell of a lot about where the thinking is in the present Republican Party.
__________________

__________________
U2387 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Democratic National Convention Thread MrsSpringsteen Free Your Mind 504 09-02-2008 03:37 PM
US 2008 Presidential Campaign/Debate Discussion Thread - Part III phillyfan26 Free Your Mind Archive 1001 01-30-2008 02:07 PM
MERGED--> NH predictions + Hillary's win + NH recount? 2861U2 Free Your Mind Archive 586 01-12-2008 01:50 PM
Official Campaign 2008 Hot Stove Thread Varitek Free Your Mind Archive 1003 09-23-2007 03:31 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com