MrRain422 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 So now something created by the Bush Administration is okay? I thought he was Satan incarnate. I'm going to need a tutorial here. Bush is evil unless it involves a position that Obama also likes? Is that right? And even though a bill passes unanimously and a president signs it and makes a statement in support of it, that party and that president didn't really mean it (see Clinton, Bill and DOMA discussion in other thread)? As for the post, it's unnecessary regardless of what the official duties are. Why should a government agency have any say or recommendations as to a private citizen's health care? Or have anything to do with anybody's medical records? It's pretty straight forward. Bad shit done by anyone is bad. Good shit done by anyone is good. Neutral shit done by anyone is neutral. What's the problem? It's not that things Bush does are good when Obama likes them -- I think they're good if they're things I like. I think they're bad if they're things I don't like. What's so hard to understand? And yes, I'm still mad at Bill Clinton about DOMA, about don't ask don't tell, about the stupid welfare reform and all sorts of other stuff. Good things are good, bad things are bad, doesn't matter who does them. What's the problem? Also, I think you misunderstand what the office actually does. Why are you so eager for private businesses to make decisions about your health? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 So now something created by the Bush Administration is okay? I thought he was Satan incarnate. I'm going to need a tutorial here. Bush is evil unless it involves a position that Obama also likes? Is that right?This is genuinely ridiculous. Come on. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I just hope our new orwellian healthcare system doesn't stem the number of erectile dysfunction tv ads Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I just hope our new orwellian healthcare system doesn't stem the number of erectile dysfunction tv ads Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 So now something created by the Bush Administration is okay? I thought he was Satan incarnate. I'm going to need a tutorial here. Bush is evil unless it involves a position that Obama also likes? Is that right? And even though a bill passes unanimously and a president signs it and makes a statement in support of it, that party and that president didn't really mean it (see Clinton, Bill and DOMA discussion in other thread)? As for the post, it's unnecessary regardless of what the official duties are. Why should a government agency have any say or recommendations as to a private citizen's health care? Or have anything to do with anybody's medical records? Just rememeber he's not a Bush fan or Bush Apologist. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Considering all the fun we and others made of her, I thought I would in fairness post this: Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol Palin, says abstinence is unrealistic in interview on Fox News News Staff Teen pregnancy? Not really a good idea. Stopping teen sex? Ain't gonna happen. So says Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's 18-year-old daughter, Bristol, who told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren Monday night that the abstinence her mom preaches is "not realistic at all." Bristol Palin's pregnancy, revealed shortly after Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) chose Sarah Palin to be his running mate, shook up the last presidential campaign. Bristol Palin, who gave birth in late December, described the rigors of being a teen mom, and while she wouldn't go into detail why it isn't realistic for guys and gals her age not to have sex, she did say it isn't smart to get knocked up. "Everyone should wait 10 years," Palin said. "I hope people learn from my story. "It's so much easier if you're married, have a house and career. It's not a situation you want to strive for." She denied that her mother's anti-abortion views were the reason she went ahead with the pregnancy. "It was my choice to have the baby," she said. "It doesn't matter what my mom's views are on it. It was my decision." But telling her mom that she and her hockey hunk boyfriend, Levi Johnston, were to be parents was tough, she admitted. "Harder than labor," she said. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 From today Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 So we are giving $20+ million for palestinian refugees? LINK As Brian from the Breakfast Club would ask, "Do you approve of this?" But..........can anyone confirm this is true? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 So it was begun by the Bush Administration as far as I could tell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Fuck a bunch of refugees, man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 So we are giving $20+ million for palestinian refugees? LINK As Brian from the Breakfast Club would ask, "Do you approve of this?" But..........can anyone confirm this is true? Yup. Few people on the Earth have gotten it harder and for longer than the Palestinians. I support Israel's right to exist and understand their need to defend themselves, but if we are EVER going to have anything remotely resembling peace in that part of the world, the Palestinians must be done right by. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dondoboy Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Is this crazy or am I?Lousinana's Gov Says "No Thanks" To Stimulus Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Is this crazy or am I?Lousinana's Gov Says "No Thanks" To StimulusWell, if I was unemployed in Louisiana, I might be a little pissed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Well, if I was unemployed in Louisiana, I might be a little pissed.I would think that Jindal is seriously considering a run for the Presidency in '12, because he probably just slit his own throat if he wants to run for Governor again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I guess there is language in the bill allowing for state legislatures to override governors who refuse the money, so LA might get their money anyway if their legislature wants it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Even further evidence of the porousness of certain borders - or - the more things change, the more they stay the same. From Salon: Bagram prisoners have no rights? I said a few days ago that I would hold off on criticizing Obama for things he might do, after Charlie Savage's disturbing piece on signs the new president might ultimately back Bush-Cheney terror policies like extraordinary rendition and indefinite detention of terror suspects. Late Friday came news of something Obama actually has done, and it's appalling: He's backed the Bush administration claim that terror suspects held at Bagram Air Force base in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights, according to the Associated Press. You might remember Bagram from Alex Gibney's devastating "Taxi to the Dark Side," which detailed the December 2002 torture and death -- I would say murder -- of a 22-year-old cab driver named Dilawar by U.S. soldiers there. Or maybe you remember Tim Golden's riveting New York Times story in 2005, detailing the death of Dilawar and another detainee at Bagram. After the Supreme Court ruled that Guant Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I think it is essential that we treat terror suspects either as prisoners of war and abide by the Geneva Conventions or, if we want to look at them as criminal suspects, they get treated like suspects of other crimes. And, you go, this guy: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...he-face-remark/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Late Friday came news of something Obama actually has done, and it's appalling: He's backed the Bush administration claim that terror suspects held at Bagram Air Force base in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights, according to the Associated Press. They don't have constitutional rights. And, you go, this guy: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...he-face-remark/ Always playing the race card. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Yeah, pointing out that a lot of black people are poor is a terrible thing. What a dick. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Yeah, pointing out that a lot of black people are poor is a terrible thing. What a dick. No, but trying to make opposition to the stimulus bill a racial thing is. That would be like calling pro-choicers racist because a disproportionate number of blacks are aborted. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dondoboy Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 They don't have constitutional rights. Always playing the race card.Bleedorange, I can finally say we agree on something. And that pleases me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I realize it is considered by many to be high-minded to not bring race into things, but I am going to argue that it is not high-minded at all, especially when it comes to economic issues. It is in fact low-minded, and smacks of sweep-under-the-rug-edness and revisionist history. Black people were targeted by the subprime lenders and have been perennial targets of other kinds of predatory lending, and I think the man is justified in calling out political grandstanding like what is going on in South Carolina and Louisiana, and pointing out that it hurts black people more than it hurts white people. I could go on and on about how long and hard black people have been shafted in this country, but I will issue this challenge - look at the life expectancy rates of black people versus white people and tell me that there's racial parity in this country, or that race is not fundamentally relevant. I dare you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 But Clyburn's playing the race card is itself political grandstanding. I'm not saying that everyone is affected equally by these political decisions, but that doesn't mean race goes into the decision-making itself or that such disparities are reason enough to accept "stimulus" funds. I'm sorry, but trying to end the debate by injecting race into it is a cheap and shameless political move. And when our government goes broke and the long-term consequences of our wreckless spending are realized, guess who's going to be disproportionately affected? Of course our country is not perfect when it comes to race, but we're never going to be perfect. The human mind is too prone to separating "us" from "them" (much like Clyburn himself is doing). That doesn't mean we haven't made huge strides in the past few decades, and that doesn't mean every disparity needs to be attributed to racism. And part of the current crisis was started because the government tried to coerce banks into making subprime loans to minorities. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moss Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Obama wants to halve the budget deficit by end of first term. Now that would be a feat. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090222/ap_on_...wh/obama_budget Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.