Our Country Has Disappeared

[gogo]

few illegal OR legal immigrants ever become green card holders.

I believe legal immigrants are green card holders. It's the Permanent Resident card for legal aliens.

 

I don't know what the stats are on green card holders who go on to achieve citizenship, but I believe that number has increased substantially since the September 11 attacks.

[Guest Speed Racer]

I believe legal immigrants are green card holders.

 

I work in the field. You're correct in stating that legal immigrants are green card holders. Legal non-immigrants are temporary workers who can or cannot transition to immigrant status, depending on the non-immigrant status they hold. Most green card holders arrive first as non-immigrants, but some do not.

 

Most people say 'immigrant' to describe any non-citizen, non-LPR present in the United States, which is not always the case.

 

edited to clarify: therefore, when I'm not at work, I use the "i" word to mean any foreign worker in the United States.

[NightOfJoy]

Jeff's quote, pertaining to this song in a Rolling Stone article, said how he felt so "beaten down after 8 crappy years" (that's pretty close, from what I remember),

 

Amen to that, I can attest to being f'n exhausted by those 8 crappy years. What a nightmare.

 

And the fact that Obama is continuing a number of policies implemented during those 8 crappy years makes me sad and even more tired.

[jakobnicholas]

I’m curious as to why you chose to defer your comments regarding the state of the nation until now, and not last year, or the year before, when the person who bears much if not most of the responsibility for our current predicament was still in office. And what, exactly, is disappearing?

 

I agree that we’re sort of in the shitter right now, and at times, it feels as though we’re circling the bowl, but this is not just a liberal issue, it’s a let’s take a long hard look at the facts and see what led us here type of issue – and if you do that, I think you’ll see that our current predicament has a hell of a lot more to do with eight plus years of mismanagement and a lack of oversight, from both democrats and republicans, and quite a bit less to do with 8-month’s worth of Obama’s policies – which are, as Beltmann (so awesomely) pointed out, by no means outside the mainstream.

 

If the country is confused about health care, it has less to do with the actual plan, though the Administration’s case in favor of leaves a lot to be desired, and more to do with the way in which republicans have framed the issue, i.e. - soviet-era-like rationing and death panels populated by nefarious bureaucrats who would, a.) like nothing more than to make compost of the elderly, and b.) ensure that the Special Olympics folds due to a lack of available participants.

 

 

 

I really don't follow politics very closely, so am not gonna try to make it sound like I know my shit, from a historical perspective.

 

I agree with you that Republicans AND Democrats are both to blame. That kind of speaks to my frustration that for the past 8 years, there seems to a sentiment that W. is responsible for EVERY problem. You basically say as much above ("when the person who bears much if not most of the responsibility for our current predicament was still in office"). It was just a stupid little quote, but it bothered me that someone as intelligent as Jeff Tweedy could throw out another tired line that implies "Bush's 8 years of crappiness have destroyed our country". It's so easy and simple to say that. It wasn't just Bush passing laws over the last 8 years. People hated the war, and he rightly can be blamed for that. But so many other things were decided with Congress' help....mostly Democratic late in his Presidency.

 

Financially, couldn't Bill Clinton be blamed as much or more than Bush? Didn't a lot of our housing loan problems start back then?

 

 

Yeah, it's the Republicans fault that Obama can't articulate whatever the hell health plan he has. Gimme a break. Obama's supposed to be our leader. If he can't handle a few Republicans criticizing his plan, then what kind of President is he? To me, Obama has ZERO excuses these first 2 years. He's got a HUGE majority in Congress, plus a media that STILL has Obama on his post-election honeymoon. I say Obama and other Democrats should stop whining and go get some shit done.

[Guest Speed Racer]

it bothered me that someone as intelligent as Jeff Tweedy could throw out another tired line that implies "Bush's 8 years of crappiness have destroyed our country". It's so easy and simple to say that.

 

Also easy to misquote. He said the eight years of crappiness made him want to write a hopeful song for the future (this, according to your own paraphrase).

 

And to me, the quote implies that Bush worked hard to destroy our country, which I (but not you, I know) can get behind.

[Beltmann]

But I don't see a whole lot from the leadership of the other side of the political spectrum that gives me great comfort or solace that they have the best interests of this country at heart.

Why? Isn't it possible for people of equal patriotism to arrive at different conclusions than you? Isn't it possible that people who disagree with your political assumptions are working, in their own way, towards the best interests of this country?

 

While I believed Bush was misguided on nearly every major policy position, I was at least willing to concede that he was doing what he thought was best for the country. I didn't feel the need to demonize Bush as a fascist who probably isn't even a citizen and is most likely in cahoots with Muslims. Heck, I even think Sarah Palin has this country's best interests at heart. I just think she's deeply wrong and full of nonsense.

[Good Old Neon]

 

Yeah, it's the Republicans fault that Obama can't articulate whatever the hell health plan he has. Gimme a break. Obama's supposed to be our leader. If he can't handle a few Republicans criticizing his plan, then what kind of President is he? To me, Obama has ZERO excuses these first 2 years. He's got a HUGE majority in Congress, plus a media that STILL has Obama on his post-election honeymoon. I say Obama and other Democrats should stop whining and go get some shit done.

 

Unfortunately, rather than discuss the merits of the actual plan, in addition to other matters having to do with reality, Republicans, along with the media (because reporting crazy is much more compelling than discussing details related to a.) reality, and b.) the actual fucking plan) , would rather keep the focus on death panels and euthanasia clinics for the elderly. So, rather than articulate the details, the current Administration has had to defend itself against those who prefer to simply make shit up. If Republicans are truly interested in participating in an adult conversation, they should denounce the buffoons within their party, but again and unfortunately, that is not the case. So, we end up where we are, in a situation where the lunatic fringe is framing the debate.

 

With that said, Obama and his Administration have certainly contributed to the confusion.

 

Again with the media hearts Obama honeymoon nonsense. You are, of course, referring to the very same media that sat idly by through the very worst of Bush’s presidency – the lying, the cover-ups, the whole sorrowful fucking shebang, no? The same media that still refuses to use the word “torture” in relation to the fact that they authorized the use of it, torture?

[IRememberDBoon]

SCREW SARAH PALIN!

[Beltmann]

You are, of course, referring to the very same media that sat idly by through the very worst of Bush’s presidency – the lying, the cover-ups, the whole sorrowful fucking shebang, no? The same media that still refuses to use the word “torture” in relation to the fact that they authorized the use of it, torture?

And the same media that twirled their moustaches over the Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers stories and actually treated these as serious questions worthy of debate: Does Michelle Obama hate America? Is Barack Obama a socialist? Is Obama a secret Muslim? Does Obama hate the American flag? Is Obama not a citizen? McCain got plenty of negative coverage, but it really never went any deeper than he's old. With Obama, the negative coverage was (and is) dominated by far more nefarious themes, like his otherness and perhaps un-American-ness. When I complain that modern conservatism is, in general, no longer a serious movement, I hold the media complicit in the decline. They have too often been willing partners in ginning up the derangement, all in the name of ratings.

 

I'm willing to concede that sometimes the media has been soft on Obama, but the problem isn't liberal bias; the real problem is that the MSM isn't interested in serious discourse.

 

EDIT: This post is all generalizations, of course.

[bleedorange]

Why? Isn't it possible for people of equal patriotism to arrive at different conclusions than you? Isn't it possible that people who disagree with your political assumptions are working, in their own way, towards the best interests of this country?

 

While I believed Bush was misguided on nearly every major policy position, I was at least willing to concede that he was doing what he thought was best for the country. I didn't feel the need to demonize Bush as a fascist who probably isn't even a citizen and is most likely in cahoots with Muslims. Heck, I even think Sarah Palin has this country's best interests at heart. I just think she's deeply wrong and full of nonsense.

 

It's all in the process. The need and desire to rush bills through to passage with little debate. These artificial deadlines to get things voted on. The 300-page amendment to the cap-and-trade bill added in the middle of the night full of the promises to representatives to garner their support. Nothing more.

 

I'm not saying that these people that think differently than me do not necessarily have the best interests of this country at heart. But their lack of respect for the process, debate, and deliberative speed with which massive reforms should be handled makes me wonder.

[Edie]

It's all in the process. The need and desire to rush bills through to passage with little debate. These artificial deadlines to get things voted on. The 300-page amendment to the cap-and-trade bill added in the middle of the night full of the promises to representatives to garner their support. Nothing more.

 

I'm not saying that these people that think differently than me do not necessarily have the best interests of this country at heart. But their lack of respect for the process, debate, and deliberative speed with which massive reforms should be handled makes me wonder.

 

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.

[Good Old Neon]

From the New York Times:

 

False ‘Death Panel’ Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots

 

Excerpt:

 

There is nothing in any of the legislative proposals that would call for the creation of death panels or any other governmental body that would cut off care for the critically ill as a cost-cutting measure. But over the course of the past few months, early, stated fears from anti-abortion conservatives that Mr. Obama would pursue a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia agenda, combined with twisted accounts of actual legislative proposals that would provide financing for optional consultations with doctors about hospice care and other “end of life” services, fed the rumor to the point where it overcame the debate.

 

And yet, New Gingrich and Sarah Palin, two (potential) presidential hopefuls would have us believe otherwise - why, and to what end?

[John Smith]

If the country is confused about health care, it has less to do with the actual plan, though the Administration’s case in favor of leaves a lot to be desired, and more to do with the way in which republicans have framed the issue, i.e. - soviet-era-like rationing and death panels populated by nefarious bureaucrats who would, a.) like nothing more than to make compost of the elderly, and b.) ensure that the Special Olympics folds due to a lack of available participants.

 

There is always the Soilent Green Option...

 

Very little mention int he media these days of Ms Palin signing and supporting a bill that endorsed the same sort of "death panels" she now seems to dislike. Little media coverage on the fact that the "death panel" provision came from the right.

 

It's all in the process. The need and desire to rush bills through to passage with little debate. These artificial deadlines to get things voted on. The 300-page amendment to the cap-and-trade bill added in the middle of the night full of the promises to representatives to garner their support. Nothing more.

 

I'm not saying that these people that think differently than me do not necessarily have the best interests of this country at heart. But their lack of respect for the process, debate, and deliberative speed with which massive reforms should be handled makes me wonder.

 

Are you discussing the Patriot act I? II? Both were many hundreds of pages long and lawmakers & citizens had little time to digest them. How about any of the myriad bills that the last administration pushed through as urgent and it happened a lot? This is a problem these days with politics...selective memory. Both sides do things and then blast the other side for doing exactly what they were doing not one year earlier. I can see why any adminsitration would ram so much through, the longer it lingers the longer the opposition has to shed light on it, or attack it. Remeber the time frames for the roberts and alito confirmations? They had to get done in those time frames or disaster hits, yet when sotomayyer had the same tiem frame it was too rushed. Bullshit. How about media and conservative reaction to the bush/hitler video? Compare that to the same media figures and their reaction to the Obama/Hitler nazi references. Selective memory.

[bleedorange]

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.

 

Yes. However, there are two big differences: (1) the Patriot Act passed 357-66 in the House and 98-1 in the Senate, and (2) it was viewed as an emergency response to 9/11. So it was something that had a lot of support from the very beginning.

 

And we'll have to agree to disagree on the current state of our health care system.

[Guest Speed Racer]

So it was something that had a lot of support from the very beginning.

 

Inspired by fear - the same emotion which, you could argue, is inspiring a lot of these economic bills to move through so quickly. Also the same emotion conservatives are trying to drum up in regards to the healthcare situation.

 

Fear is legislative vaseline.

[bleedorange]

Are you discussing the Patriot act I? II? Both were many hundreds of pages long and lawmakers & citizens had little time to digest them. How about any of the myriad bills that the last administration pushed through as urgent and it happened a lot? This is a problem these days with politics...selective memory. Both sides do things and then blast the other side for doing exactly what they were doing not one year earlier. I can see why any adminsitration would ram so much through, the longer it lingers the longer the opposition has to shed light on it, or attack it. Remeber the time frames for the roberts and alito confirmations? They had to get done in those time frames or disaster hits, yet when sotomayyer had the same tiem frame it was too rushed. Bullshit. How about media and conservative reaction to the bush/hitler video? Compare that to the same media figures and their reaction to the Obama/Hitler nazi references. Selective memory.

 

Seriously, dude, I don't know how many times I have to tell you this, but the whole "Bush did this" and "selective memory" arguments mean nothing to me. It wasn't right then and it's not right now. Never has been. And I never voted for Bush.

 

Do you have it now? Or will this spur on another paragraph?

[ikol]

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.

[bleedorange]

Inspired by fear - the same emotion which, you could argue, is inspiring a lot of these economic bills to move through so quickly. Also the same emotion conservatives are trying to drum up in regards to the healthcare situation.

 

Fear is legislative vaseline.

 

Perhaps. But none of these recent bills can claim 85% or 98% majorities. And, just so I understand, the Patriot Act passed quickly in response to a terrorist attack on American soil. Therefore, any and all future legislation should get the same treatment, based on whatever fear can be drummed up?

 

Also, the Patriot Act has been reauthorized twice, the most recent in 2006 with a fairly close vote in the House and an 89-10 vote in the Senate (including a Yea vote from Obama).

 

Why are we talking about the Patriot Act?

[John Smith]

Seriously, dude, I don't know how many times I have to tell you this, but the whole "Bush did this" and "selective memory" arguments mean nothing to me. It wasn't right then and it's not right now. Never has been. And I never voted for Bush.

 

Do you have it now? Or will this spur on another paragraph?

 

Screw you, you apparently miss the point yet agree with me in a disagreeable manner? Whatever, Do you have it now? Propbably not, never will.

[ikol]

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare

 

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

[bjorn_skurj]

 

Yeah, I'm one of those people.

Well, then, I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on that point.

[John Smith]

Also, the Patriot Act has been reauthorized twice, the most recent in 2006 with a fairly close vote in the House and an 89-10 vote in the Senate (including a Yea vote from Obama).

 

Why are we talking about the Patriot Act?

 

Patriot Act votes have huge politcal implications, It has been a fucking cudgel used to beat people with, even beat those who voted for it.

 

We are talking about it as an example of legislation that was ramrodded through congress, much faster than the health care bill has been. From a business stand point the patriot act has been a pile of shite. It has caused onerous reporting issues and has cost business $$ at every turn, at least those who comply with it.

 

I'm done here.

[jakobnicholas]

Inspired by fear - the same emotion which, you could argue, is inspiring a lot of these economic bills to move through so quickly. Also the same emotion conservatives are trying to drum up in regards to the healthcare situation.

 

Fear is legislative vaseline.

 

 

 

Fear was NEVER used as a tactic against Bush and Cheney.

 

 

Are some Republicans using scare tactics? Maybe. They don't like the bill, so they're gonna do all they can to stop it.....the Democrats have done the same thing in the past.

 

If Obama can't get his health bill passed through the Democratic Congress, Republican scare tactics won't be the reason.

[Guest Speed Racer]

the Democrats have done the same thing in the past.

 

Read my post again, please. I said they are doing it now. Fear is a universal emotion and therefore a universal weapon. I never said it wasn't.

[Good Old Neon]

 

 

 

Are some Republicans using scare tactics? Maybe. They don't like the bill, so they're gonna do all they can to stop it.....the Democrats have done the same thing in the past.

 

Maybe????

 

Please provide a recent example in which a democrat has agreed with, promoted, and/or attempted to implement/legislate the views of a hysterical Glenn Beck-type, liberal commentator.

 

 

 

 

If Obama can't get his health bill passed through the Democratic Congress, Republican scare tactics won't be the reason.

 

No?

 

From Salon:

 

I've said this before: It's getting past time for President Obama to spell out specifics about which healthcare reform plan he supports, given the five House and Senate bills and umpteen other proposals circling Washington. And unfortunately for Obama's dreams of bipartisanism, it's way past time for him to give up his hopes that he can bring "sensible" Republicans on board with a smart, fair bill.

 

I've suspected that was true for a while, but today is the day to, well, pull the plug on that project. Unbelievably, one GOP senator who's been held up as a paragon of reason and bipartisan comity, Iowa's Chuck Grassley -- one of three Republicans negotiating with three Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee -- trashed Obama's plan today in terms that went beyond Sarah Palin's ignorant rant.

 

"There is some fear because in the House bill, there is counseling for end-of-life," Grassley told a town hall crowd. "And from that standpoint, you have every right to fear. You shouldn't have counseling at the end of life. You ought to have counseling 20 years before you're going to die. You ought to plan these things out. And I don't have any problem with things like living wills. But they ought to be done within the family. We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma."

 

"You have every right to fear." What a statesman! Where to start? There are at least five different healthcare reform bills vying for support, and their many provisions can be confusing, but there is not one sentence in any of the five that mandates either "death panels" or "pulling the plug on grandma" -- and Chuck Grassley knows that much much better than I do.

 

Let's try to take Grassley at face value: that he truly believes end-of-life counseling should take place earlier than the end of life (supposed "liberals" like Lee Siegel and Chuck Lane, cosseted Beltway softies like Grassley, say they agree). Perhaps Chuck and Chuck and Lee were prepared to gather with their team of lawyers, doctors, wives, children and accountants in, say, their 50s or even 60s (rich people live longer, surprise!) to decide on end-of-life/living-will questions. But many families don't have those resources, and they understandably don't get to those questions until they're unfortunately all too pressing and relevant.

 

link - http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/?last_story=/opinion/walsh/politics/2009/08/14/inglewood/