ikol

Africa: Vampire Weekend

There could be an argument made that bailing out the financial sector was necessary and helped avert the crisis (I'm not entirely convinced of this, but at least there's some rational basis to it), but bailing out GM was ridiculous. There are plenty of cars companies that were not failing because they made decent cars. If GM had been allowed to fail, there might have been some temporary problems, but eventually the other companies would have filled to hole left by GM.

Well, I guess my head is in the sand.

Yeah, I just meant that it didn't really fit the definition of irony.

As for Obama’s choice to continue many of Bush’s policies, both foreign and domestic, I agree – it’s bullshit.

Not to mention using tax dollars to bail out corporations, buy and destroy old cars, and pay for healthcare.

The ironic difference between, say, right wing attacks against Obama and left wing attacks against Bush, is that a great number of accusations leveled at Bush were true. Torture (a war crime) – fabricating evidence in support of a war, also know as, “making shit up” (war crime) – wiretapping (unconstitutional) – the events following Katrina (ineptitude) – hiring folks who were not even remotely qualified for their posts (nepotism) – I’m sure I’m leaving out tons of shit.

I fail to see the irony. I'm also not getting a whole lot of Hitler from that. And as far as unconstitutionality goes, Obama's policies take the cake.

Well, "a lot" is relative and I don't know what you mean by it. Regardless, I think we can agree that the vast majority of Obama-is-Hitler protesters are aligned with right-wing groups rather than LaRouche. The more relevant point deals with how each side of the spectrum generally treats their lunatic fringe: While mainstream Democrats have a long record of shunning and marginalizing LaRouche types (like Frank dismissing that woman), mainstream Republicans are now actively courting and riling up their crazies (like DeLay validating the birthers last night).

Maybe so. I honestly don't know or care whether those calling Obama Hitler are mainstream Republicans as it does not affect my inclination to ignore them. However, I don't recall a lot of fury on the left when Bush was Hitlerized for 8 years.

Is DeLay considered a mainstream Republican?

He's on Dancing with the Stars. You can't get more mainstream than that.

Aren't a lot of the people comparing Obama to Hitler with the Lyndon LaRouche cult?

the fountainhead > atlas shrugged

Agreed.

Frank is lucky that he's receiving all this criticism from batshit crazy people, because he tends to respond similarly to rational criticism and doesn't come off as well.

I read Atlas Shrugged and thought it was a pretty awful book. Basically, as Good Old Neon says, it is poorly written on just about every level I can think of.

 

ikol, did you like the book itself, or the theme(s) of the book? Just curious. Obviously, plenty of people like the book itself.

Agreeing (somewhat) with the themes certainly helped, but I actually liked it more for the plot. I first read it back in high school when I was still forming my beliefs and didn't know much about Ayn Rand, so it wasn't just that I was a rabid fan of her philosophy. The writing style is pretty simple and there are definitely plenty of over the top dramatic parts, but it had a plot that kept me interested. I never would've thought I could get through a 1200 page book about a railroad company.

Well I read and enjoyed it twice, and I don't read a lot of 1200 page books.

Have you read the health care bill?

I prefer my dystopian novels to be fictional.

My point was going to be that the only selfish douches in Atlas Shrugged are those trying to "help" people.

Have you read Atlas Shrugged?

"This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force." - Dorothy Parker

Atlas Shrugged is a much better use of 1200 pages than the healthcare bill.

So most of the people being polled on this healthcare bill haven't had a chance to read it yet?

I don't want to see old people or disabled people dead in the streets or poor.

So either the government funds healthcare and they send everyone's grandparents to the gas chamber, or they don't and the streets fill up with dead bodies? No wonder this debate goes nowhere.

Can I make the statement that the folks here that do not support health care reform also feel that global warming is bullshit?

Well, the planet has been cooling for like 10 years...

Seriously, man -- atleast the opposition is being invited to these things. When Dubya had these town hall things, it was invite only. Any sniff of opposition was stopped at the door.

I guess my invitation got lost in the mail.

Does any rational person actually believe that we're careening toward socialism?

Yes. Not that this is a new thing. It's been going on at least since FDR.

No these are just hateful people. Who prolly are in opposition to Obama cuz hes black.

Does any rational person actually believe...nevermind.

I agree that Dems need to step up and not be spineless and show some balls.

That sort of thing got the last Democrat President in trouble.

who? me?

No, kwall. People here used to always accuse us of being the same person.

It, capitalism had itself a little break down not too long ago, and I do not recall the banking/financial/auto industry and/or Wall Street decrying socialism’s evils as they were cashing their billion dollar welfare checks.

That's because no one hates capitalism more than big businesses. It's much easier to spend a little money lobbying the government to pass favorable policies than it is to actually compete. Furthering socializing the government only makes such rent seeking more prevalent.

Durden? Mr. Tyler Durden?

Would you like to buy some soap?

But my alter ego would actually be me. Either I'm extremely insane, or you're a separate person.

My evil twin returns!

Great book.

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare

A nice Op-Ed by the CEO of Whole Foods.

Is the proposed government plan a single-payer system, or an option to HMOs/private health insurance that many people cannot afford? As I understand it, under the government plan you would have the option of choosing between the government option and one less likely to decide your great uncle Chuck is unfit to live.

Same here. Policy shouldn't be based upon theoretical options, but upon realistic options.

Exactly. Theoretically, you would still be a able to choose private insurance. Realistically, insurance companies will not be able to compete with a government program because 1)as Bush and now Obama have proven, the government doesn't have to have revenue to spend it and 2)the government can set its own reimbursement rates much like Medicare does, which would further drive up the prices that private plans would have to pay.

So if this is true, then perhaps doctors need to be reined in by bureaucrats, if they are just needlessly extending people's lives, just adding on "garbage time" at the cost of billions, which would be better spent on things that would make people healthier earlier on in life, and thus healthier in their old age.

While doctors may not always effectively communicate with their patients and explain their options and likely results well enough, the decision on aggressive treatment usually rests on the patients and their families. They are the ones wanting their lives extended.

Y'know, what it ultimately comes down to (and this is the part that many people in this country can't take) is that we will all have to give up some of our choices and options to provide some level of health care for everyone.

Yeah, I'm one of those people.

Couldn't the same have been said of the Patriot Act? And while you say might say to my comment that "many people's lives were at stake -- speed was of the essence", I think far more lives are at stake with the state of our unsatisfactory health care system.

Great point. Look at how horrible of a bill the Patriot Act was. This bill is turning into Obama's Patriot Act.

That's certainly better than Nancy Pelosi. At least the profit-driven millionaire has an understandable reason to let me die.

All sarcasm aside, at least with a private system I can look at all the available plans and decide what I like. If a plan has a record of offing old people, and I want to live long enough to get dementia, I can go with another plan. With a government-funded/run plan, it's only possible to change the plan if I can convince a couple hundred million other people that what I want is right, and even then, the resulting legislation is going to end up being some over-complicated, morbidly obese bill full of special interest provisions and rushed to passage so that legislators can have it on their resume in time for reelection.

If socialized medicine works so well in other nations why do people buy individual insurance on top of the government plan in a lot of these nations? The "death panels" refers to government bureaucrats deciding when to withhold care, not actively kill people. Now there are many cases where withholding care is a good thing, and in this country we are often too aggressive with care without thinking about quality of life. I just don't think someone hired by Nancy Pelosi should be involved in the decision. Our life expectancy in this country is 78, compared to about 79-80 in other places. Even assuming that this is due to medical care and not the myriad other factors that contribute, how freaking long do you want to live?