Elizabeth Edwards article excerpt

[Rugger]

However, Edwards’ critique of Obama’s plan doesn’t mean that she’s saving any love for McCain’s health care proposals. Edwards – who has battled breast cancer since 2004 – said McCain’s plan fails in all important areas by leaving the decision-making process up to individuals, who can frequently “make stupid economics decisions.”

and there it is.......

 

[AE14]

I guess Elizabeth Edwards' opinion is important now?

 

[Rugger]

That's not the point.

 

[Delta Force]

what is the point?

 

[RobInKuwait]

The point is that the left wants Socialized Health Care because they don't trust Americans to be smart enough to do what's best for themselves.

Its an infectious attitude that leads to a Nanny State that perpetuates the attitude even further. When people live under the assumption that the government will provide for them they lose the incentive to provide for themselves.

 

[AE14]

The point is that the left wants Socialized Health Care because they don't trust Americans to be smart enough to do what's best for themselves.

Its an infectious attitude that leads to a Nanny State that perpetuates the attitude even further. When people live under the assumption that the government will provide for them they lose the incentive to provide for themselves.

I am glad to know she speaks for the entire left.


I guess when Bush said life would be easier if he were dictator, he speaks for the entire right.

Glad to see how that works

 

[RobInKuwait]

I am glad to know she speaks for the entire left.

She doesn't speak for the whole left, but she said what the whole left was thinking.

I guess when Bush said life would be easier if he were dictator, he speaks for the entire right.

Glad to see how that works

I'd think any President would find life to be easier without checks and balances. That's the beauty of divided government, it makes it so the President is not a dictator. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[AE14]

She doesn't speak for the whole left, but she said what the whole left was thinking.

I assume you took a poll?

I'd think any President would find life to be easier without checks and balances. That's the beauty of divided government, it makes it so the President is not a dictator. Wouldn't you agree?

SO for the first 6 years of the Bush admin, he was a dictator?

 

[RobInKuwait]

I assume you took a poll?

Yes. 100% are commie marxists. Its about as accurate as a NY Times/NBC Poll. :rofl:

SO for the first 6 years of the Bush admin, he was a dictator?

Haven't you said that?

Divided government means a less overzealous and radical government. Parties have to work together to get legislation accomplished. Thats not a bad thing.

 

[AE14]

Yes. 100% are commie marxists. Its about as accurate as a NY Times/NBC Poll. :rofl:

feeling slightly irrational today obviously political polls are subjective, but I will just watch you swim in the pool of generalities

Haven't you said that?

Divided government means a less overzealous and radical government. Parties have to work together to get legislation accomplished. Thats not a bad thing.

please quote where I said he was that? I would love to see it.

I agree that it should be balanced, and would love to see (based on recent history) a dem pres. and repub. congress as that is much better than the opposite that there is right now

 

[RobInKuwait]

please quote where I said he was that? I would love to see it.

Here it is:

For the first six years of the Bush administration he was a dictator! I also can't bench over 100 pounds!

There you go. Found it! :rofl:

You're right, I just searched and you didn't say it.

I'm so used to hearing....Bush and Cheney are dictators rah rah! When I used to live in Germany, a German said to me, "Bush is like Hitler!" I was like, "So you're comparing Bush to Hitler....where did Hitler come from?"

I agree that it should be balanced, and would love to see (based on recent history) a dem pres. and repub. congress as that is much better than the opposite that there is right now

From historical perspective, Reagan and Eisenhower were rep pres and dem congress. They had the largest periods of peacetime economic growth in the 20th century.

Examples of dem pres and dem congress were FDR, LBJ, Carter....you know....some the worst economic times in the 20th century.

Divided government, either way is good. The last thing this country needs is to give left wing liberals carte blanche access to instill social programs. We're in route to a recession. Social programs do not work. At least McCain doesn't owe the house and senate majority leaders favors. Obama will owe them so many favors for helping him get elected that he won't veto anything. Not to mention, based on his record of voting with dems 98% of the time, he wouldn't veto anyways.

 

[AE14]

Reagen and Eisenhower are interesting examples, however with the modern failures of the dem congress and rep president, I am voting to switch them enitrely.

How anyone can vote for this congress is beyond me

 

[RobInKuwait]

How anyone can vote for this congress is beyond me

Agreed. McCain is the only way to reign in Reid, Pelosi and company.

 

[AE14]

Agreed. McCain is the only way to reign in Reid, Pelosi and company.

I dont agree, I think we need to vote some of these buggers out asap. That is my plan

 

[RobInKuwait]

I dont agree, I think we need to vote some of these buggers out asap. That is my plan

The problem is, 99% of Americans can't vote for Barney Frank's, Chris Dodd's, Nancy Pelosi's, or Harry Reid's opponent. They can only vote on their local senator or representative.

Every projection I've seen says the Democratic majority and their leadership in congress is not changing. Thats why someone needs to reign them in.

 

[AE14]

with the projections as they are, even mccain wont be able to do that. Once their majority increases watch out.

 

[RobInKuwait]

with the projections as they are, even mccain wont be able to do that. Once their majority increases watch out.

He will insofar as their majority isn't veto-proof. Their majority will not increase in 2010.

 

[AE14]

McCain is just too dangerous imo. His view on the war and on foreign relations is archaic. However, had he chosen a moderate running mate to build the party around in 2012, he would have had my vote. Instead we know how that went.

Also Rob, you might find this interesting. In my department (history) we were discussing our political affiliations and the majority of us were truly Bull Moose Republicans relatively socially liberal and fiscally conservative. It is a shame that segment of the Republican party is gone and what is left is no more than a religious organization who is anything but fiscally conservative. Where is Teddy when you need him?

 

[EasyEJL]

Reagen and Eisenhower are interesting examples, however with the modern failures of the dem congress and rep president, I am voting to switch them enitrely.

How anyone can vote for this congress is beyond me

How many other presidents have had 2 economic collapses while in office, one at the very beginning and one he tried to get congress to take action against but they ignored him, and also a surprise attack on american soil? answer is 0. I KNOW bush did better with the hand he was dealt than Gore or Kerry or Obama would have. For many of the other criticisms as well, it was the media using bush as an easy scapegoat protecting democrats. Katrina? guess what, its the local area's responsibility to be prepared for local disasters. The fact that they had foreknowledge of the storms path and knew their risk and yet didn't stock up on supplies isn't Bush's fault. could FEMA have acted faster? Maybe, but they aren't there to be first responders.

 

[EasyEJL]

Also Rob, you might find this interesting. In my department (history) we were discussing our political affiliations and the majority of us were truly Bull Moose Republicans relatively socially liberal and fiscally conservative. It is a shame that segment of the Republican party is gone and what is left is no more than a religious organization who is anything but fiscally conservative. Where is Teddy when you need him?

There are moments where the blue dog democrats become attractive. What is interesting is they are projecting that they will control 60 of the seats in the house this year. Could make for a serious problem for Pelosi. Seems like they will be picking up most of the seats the republicans loose.

 

[AE14]

How many other presidents have had 2 economic collapses while in office, one at the very beginning and one he tried to get congress to take action against but they ignored him, and also a surprise attack on american soil? answer is 0. I KNOW bush did better with the hand he was dealt than Gore or Kerry or Obama would have. For many of the other criticisms as well, it was the media using bush as an easy scapegoat protecting democrats. Katrina? guess what, its the local area's responsibility to be prepared for local disasters. The fact that they had foreknowledge of the storms path and knew their risk and yet didn't stock up on supplies isn't Bush's fault. could FEMA have acted faster? Maybe, but they aren't there to be first responders.

I am glad you are so certain of things no one can know for sure :eyeroll:

In terms of Katrina that was a disaster, and no it was not entirely the Bish administrations fault. However, they were ridiculously slow to act, and considering it was their own countrymen/women that was disturbing. Bush is a stereotypical republican, overall bad domestic policy

 

[AE14]

There are moments where the blue dog democrats become attractive. What is interesting is they are projecting that they will control 60 of the seats in the house this year. Could make for a serious problem for Pelosi. Seems like they will be picking up most of the seats the republicans loose.

trust me, I am none too pleased about this. This congress has been a disgrace, and will continue to be under Pelosi's leadership

 

[EasyEJL]

I am glad you are so certain of things no one can know for sure :eyeroll:

In terms of Katrina that was a disaster, and no it was not entirely the Bish administrations fault. However, they were ridiculously slow to act, and considering it was their own countrymen/women that was disturbing. Bush is a stereotypical republican, overall bad domestic policy

yes, 3 days was slow to act, however the local government should have been able to handle those 3 days better. Go back to the constitution, and think about local responsibility vs national. The response to florida hurricans was no faster, but florida was self prepared.