Permission to EXECUTE!

"What has driven me wild over the last 15 or so years is the growing belief on both sides that the other side has nothing to offer."

Healthcare and Cap and Trade are bigger in scope than anything attempted since the 60's. At least as big. One party representing half the country has been totally shut out of all discussion during the writing of the bills. They were debated but the final products had ZERO input. Say what you will about Bush. He did include the dems. Maybe not to the extent the dems wanted but far more than what's taking place now.
Example. Ted Kennedy's no child left behind.

Lou, I think you were a teacher like I am. Teachers unions have done the same. They totally alienate Repubs. Why not include all sides in the discussion then make a decision.

Like you I have never seen it worse than it is now. My school is 50/50 con/lib and there is a definite cooling between staff members unlike any I've witnessed in 26 years

 

Correct me if I'm wrong Lou, but weren't you a teacher?

 

Happy holidays to you and everyone else here on the WW2F as well.

 

Stef, how come you are so interested in the silly sh1t that goes on over here in the US anyway? Is it genuine concern and interest in the progression and shortcomings in the US government and it's practices, or the constant battle between liberals and conservatives over ideology, or just plain and simple comic relief? Just curious.

 

OK, im trying my best to be biased about the health care thing. Now, as someone who was formerly in Law Enforcement-even if not a Policeman nor a Constable nor even a Deputy, still I as a Correctional Officer, I came across many things that made you sit back and really think things through.

That said, I must ask a question which is: Why is reid and pelosi and the main idiot himself, in such a rush to pass something that is seemingly THIS important-as well as holding secret meetings with others-excluding all republicans and such and also undermining what the majority of Americans want-all the while totally ignoring the Constitution and the laws therin? If this is such a good thing? why all the secrecy and the secret meetings behind closed doors, all these special earmarks to certain individuals to get the votes they need to pass this thing? Why did the GOVT and the fools all involved with this STUPID BILL, NOT do what they promised and not allowed the American people and the VERY few politicians to represent us in what we want-and not what they want?

Im GDmned mad as hell that our laws were totally ignored by those MFers who are rushing this thing through. reid-is marking it last days in power and I fully believe it (reid) and the other its like (pelosi) and such, will be voted (and rightfully so) out of office.

Oh and, I think today signs of 2010 are starting to appear-when a democrat left that party and joined the republican party.

One thing that irritates me the most is when those jerk-offs in Washington and in the liberal news media, are constantly trying to call everybody who is or was a part of those Tea Party rallies-are racist and a danger to the Country-just because WE disagree with what those fools like reid, pelosi and obama-lama-ding-dong, want--which is to totaly destroy our great nation be weakening it at ever turn and chance they get. Personally, im getting VERY FED UP with OLDD-apoligizing for every damned thing to every damned country it travels to. Yeah, I now referr to OLDD as an "it".

That freak, and the others mentioned, are totally destoying what so many of our Soldiers died trying to save. Does this now mean that all of our soldiers ever killed in battle in every war we were ever a part of, did they die for nothing?????????

 

Interesting question and apologies if this response is a little self indulgent but it is not intended to cause offence, simply the introspective ramblings of an interested if ignorant outsider.

I think the first thing is that US politics can be fascinating in so many ways. Take the apparently genuine hatred between Dems and Reps, we have nothing like that over here, people may disagree on political issues but most of us keep our voting 'hand' close to our chest as it were. I don't really know how most of my friends vote, I wouldn't ask and I'd be shocked if they flaunted it. Hence the apparent willingness of (at least some) Americans to not only openly show their allegience but to almost define themselves by it is pretty interesting.

Another more serious issue strikes me though, at the time of the revolution the newly created US was one of the most advanced nations in the world both politically and philosophically. It seems however that many people have simply accepted that certain great documents produced by the founding fathers are perfect and need not evolve at all. In many ways this seems symptomatic of a much wider problem, it seems crazy that concepts which are pretty much accepted throughout the western world as normal, indeed sensible, are terrifying to so many Americans, public healthcare being one of them (our NHS may not be perfect but it works reasonably well and is part of life, it's certainly better than not having any national healthcare). At the same time as Europe becomes increasingly secular, encouraging further separation of church and state, the US seems to be becoming increasingly relgious. This is not in itself a bad thing however when US presidents claim to be directly doing 'god's will' in language more akin to that used by medieval European kings and queens or indeed by Islamic fundamentalists one can't help but worry. Similarly the tendancy to allow religion to interfear in science and education (creationism being taught as science anyone?) is worrying at best, dangerous at worse.

To sum this little ramble up, how can one not be interested in the politics of a nation which is scientifically so advanced and yet politically and ideologically chained to it's past?

The second reason for my interest is far more simple, what happens in the US directly affects us because the USA is the worlds only superpower. When our PM's roll over and beg at the whim of the US president how can one not be interested in what the whims of that president might be? This is why like many other Europeans I really wanted Obama to get in, because after years of Bush leading Blair around like a poodle on his 'crusade' and with McCain looking rather too much like Bush I wanted change. In fact whatever his domestic policy I think Obama's foreign policy has been far more inline with what I would want and let's face it, he hasn't managed to get any British soldiers killed in pointless wars of dubious legality yet so hey, that's always a bonus.

Finally yeah, there is the comic relief aspect. We have more than our fair share of clowns Boris Johnson being a pretty good example (though a terribly intelligent chap who has very cleverly crafted his own niech in the public conciousness). That said it can still be pretty entertaining to look at another countries loonies instead of our own for a change, Sarah Palin being a pretty good example.

So yeah, my interest in US politics is threefold:
1. General interest in the minefield of contradictions that is modern America.
2. Interest in the way the wind blows in the worlds only superpower.
3. It's a fairly good distraction from our own joke of a government.

There y'are A58, bet you are regretting asking. Please I hope nobody takes offense, this is simply an outsiders perspective and it's always worth thinking how we look to others, even if we simply decide they are wrong and get on with it.

Welcome to the world of a Liberal, now you know how it felt to be called a coward or a danger to the country just because you didn't support the madcap wars of the nutter who preceeded Obama. It's just the way the world works, the only difference is that you are on the side of those being accused rather than the accusors as you were oh so recently.

Not at all Carl, however just as we have to accept that the British Empire did a lot of things which ranged from slightly unethical to outright evil, maybe it is time the US accepted the fact that maybe some of the things done in it's name have been fairly reprehensible. Let's face it, most nations have done a good many things which they should probably apologise for, maybe the key to the survival of the US as a superpower where it's predecessors have failed is accepting it's limitations and it's mistakes then working out how to move on from them rather than dressing them up as glory and becoming hated by those under the yolk of it's empire? Hopefully (from your POV at least) the US is learning from our mistakes.

 

Yes, they sure were, weren't they.

Just so, and apparently that is where I threw people off. I wasn't attempting to start a thread about the health care reform act as much as I was trying to get people to start thinking along the lines of what they are capable of doing to get rid of 'laws' once congress passes them and the president signs them.

Hence, I opened the thread as I did. So that discussion would focus on what America would be like if the people stood up and made their servants obey them, rather than things proceed as they are (unfortunately) truly falling out.

Obviously, things got quite off track and my efforts to correct that and to clarify things failed.

I must have struck a nerve to have gotten the kinds and amounts of replies that I did. Since this thread (IMHO) is never going to be what I had intended, I may as well throw in another of my 'war stories' about things I have experienced that bear on what we all can see for ourselves in this thread.

Way back, I used to drive a taxicab outside the last base I was stationed at in the US Army. For background, I am a white male that had a black male [call him Jim], his white female [lets call her Jane] boarder (she claimed to not be seeing him, and was just renting a room in his house) and her aunt [call her Janet] as frequent passengers in my cab. Several times, Jim and I would drive around on various calls and shoot the sh1t. Although it wasn't until years later that I realized what was going on, he and Janet were looking for someone for Jane. Jane had been a passenger in my cab a couple of times and then all three of them starting riding regularly.

Any way, after Jim and Janet had apparently satisfied themselves as to my character, they started dropping hints (and later came right out and said it) that perhaps Jane and I would make a good couple. So one night, Jim made the mistake of asking me how I felt about interracial couples (he correctly realized that my disinterest in Jane was do to her living with him) and so I told him my thoughts about black and white couples.

Needless to say, the debate grew heated when I still refused to consider dating Jane as I refused to believe she was just a boarder and not dating him. Jim finally asked me straight out why that would matter and I told him that from my experience, with seeing all the drama involved when white guys dated black girls, or dating a white girl that had become infected with the same drama from dating a black guy, I was totally turned off to the idea of dating blacks or those that did.

Of course, this lead to the 'charge' of being a racist (which is true, if you mean a guy that prefers the company of his own) to which I responded with a question. I asked Jim why I would have let him ride around with me several times if I was truly a racist (by any definition other than the one above) and when he couldn't figure it out I told him. I said I preferred the company of people like myself, and despite the fact that he drank, smoked, and did drugs (NOT things I have any interest in), and was black, I 'hung around' with him because we were both veterans.

Although Jim accepted this reasoning, he was still a bit cranked up about my feelings about interracial relationships. At one point, he actually said something like "one of us needs an attitude adjustment to get his head screwed on straight, as he ain't thinking right". He even said something about it being 'un american' to be racist or against interracial relationships, and that Americans were supposed to be accepting of different people and their values. I told Jim that there were a couple of things wrong with his position.

#1 An air-defense artillery vet was talking tough to an infantry vet, and..

#2 Two Americans were having a disagreement about their points of view, and only one of them was thinking that the other guy was wrong to have his point of view, and that he should be made to change his point of view (by force if necessary); Whereas the guy with the supposedly 'wrong' point of view was the one who was accepting that they disagreed with each other, but that the other fellow had a right to his own opinion even if he personally disagreed with it.

Jim wasn't thrilled, but eventually had to admit that I was correct. He didn't like my opinion, but came to respect my right to it.

The moral of the story is, even if you don't like someones opinion, at least respect their right to it.

I got the idea that I was once again being misunderstood (Like the time when a well respected WW2F member and I were debating in a thread and started PM'ing each other. He actually wrote that he had first thought that I was Quote "another teenager high on Nazi propaganda" Unquote).

This time, I have the feeling that I was being pictured as some back-woods, hillbilly boy hick, leaning back in my rickety chair with a can of bud in my left hand and a 5th of jack Daniels in my right, with my bare, dirty feet propped up on the edge of the table so my toes could reach them thar keys---dontcha no!

Looking back, I think I can see how this comes about. Assume that you read the papers, watch the news, and expect that if you do this, then you should be well informed about events. That being the case, when you then read something that totally contradicts what you believe to be the truth, you have to make a decision on whether or not to credit the other fellows views or opinions.

Even if only subconsciously, if your mind is already made up that someone is basically 'full of it' then you will not credit what they say (regardless of whether they are actually telling you the truth or not) and this then leads one to make the mistake of not keeping an open mind. That of course, the underlining contempt for a view that clearly must be that of an ignorant fool, prevents even the best people from being capable of learning anything form debating the other fellow.

This thread, I believe, is a good example of just such a thing. On the one hand, we have a guy that has personal, first hand, life long experience with the 'things that just are not right' in the good 'ole US of A. And then we have fellows who have read the headlines (and thus consider themselves well informed) and cannot believe what they are reading here, as it seems that everything they thought they knew must all be lies if this thread is actually 'telling it like it is'.

Ever since I myself first heard of this, I have made it a point to ask around (on the bus, in the mall/stores, on campus, you name it) and almost no one had heard a word about the provisions to fine people who didn't have health insurance. Most of the people I talked to said that they didn't have health care right now, and these folks then will be the ones that are going to be hardest hit by any such provisions if they are not stuck down at the last minute (read that as, SOON). I think it likely that talking directly with the people who are going to be affected by this is going to give the only accurate picture of what they really feel, and as the headlines are misdirecting attention away from this, they should not be trusted.

Looking at the second line of my recently update signature, one could easily assume that I am fond of Mr Hitler. The reality is, I see his tactics being used against the people of my nation.

 

SM, the irony of the above post is deliscious!

Incidentally, allow me to posit another suggestion, that in fact since you have already stated that you prefer to 'hang around' with 'your own' maybe this is reflected in your views? That actually the thing which you feel means you are best placed to judge a situation actually doesn't help at all as you are using the views of a group of people who are 'like you' to judge the feeling of a nation, many millions of whom are quite clearly not like you? This being so, one would think that anyone so open to the views of others would welcome the views of an outsider.

I also find your ramble interesting for this point:

"#1 An air-defense artillery vet was talking tough to an infantry vet, and.."

Now then, what on earth is this supposed to mean? Is your view somehow more valid as you are ex infantry? Or is it that if it came to a fight you would win? If it is the former then you will pardon me for having a good giggle. If it is the latter, I can't help but wonder what the relevance is.

I recognise your right to your opinion, I also however reserve the right to evaluate it based on both the facts of the case as I see them and, more importantly, on the strength of your argument itself. I have at no point claimed to be an expert on the political situation in the US, all I have done is point out the logical flaws in your argument, not to mention the contradictions and hypocracies. As a wise man recently said, you are entitled to your opinion, you are welcome to express it however we can justifiably disregard it because it is demonstrably contradictory and logically flawed.

And so whilst I respect your right to an opinion, please don't expect me to leave it unchallenged if it has clear flaws, even if you are an infantry vet (from a donkey walloper to an earth pig )

 

"As a wise man recently said, you are entitled to your opinion, you are welcome to express it however we can justifiably disregard it because it is demonstrably contradictory and logically flawed."

Of course you leave open the option that your logic is flawed or that what you think is merely opinion and not as logical as you might think. Just sayin

 

Possible and I accept that however until someone actually shows where the error in my logic is I will stand by my opinion.

I am more than willing to point out the clear logical flaws once again if they need clarifying.

In fact since SW has failed to provide evidence that the entire senate are accepting bribes or indeed that none of them are acting out of political conviction rather than seeking personal gain his entire argument (and ergo the opinion it justifies) remains largely conjecture anyhow.

 

If one is paid to do something they otherwise didn't want to do could it be called bribery? If a politician is paid by someone to vote a certain way is it called bribery? If Harry Reid gives a politician something--anything, say perpetual medicaid payment to a state that otherwise would have had to pay it themselves, why isn't it called bribery?

 

No, not sorry for asking at all. I was genuinely curious about your interest in what goes on here, which is much more than most people from here are, or should be anyway. And I didn't think that you were a "Yankofile" at all.

Merry Christmas y'all!

 

A58, I am a bit of a 'yankophile' in that I thoroughly like most Americans I have met (some of whom are close personal or family friends, granted), like a lot of the things coming out of America. That said, US politics can be fascinating and terrifying in equal measure.

Hmm, you don't quite understand the concept of evidence do you?

 

Ok, fair enough. It's hard to tell sometimes from your posts whether you are a Yankofile or a Yankophobe you know.

 

That's because I'm a miserable so and so who hates everyone

Bah humbug!

Or maybe I just tend to fight the prevailing wind, whatever that may be

Anyhow, my family are finally up and about so Merry Christmas to all and we'll have to continue this later.

 

"Hmm, you don't quite understand the concept of evidence do you?"

You mean the evidence that my state and others will pay the medicaid costs of the state of Nebraska in perpetuity. That's a long time. These payments were not part of the healthcare bill until Ben Nelson's vote was needed to pass. It then became so important to the American people that we pay Nebraskas medicaid that we offered to pay it forever. Must be the Christmas spirit. No evidence of a payoff there (sarc)

 

First a definition:
Bribery, a form of pecuniary corruption, is an act implying money or gift given that alters the behavior of the recipient

Keep in mind it is all very legal. I'm sure if it weren't the politicians would make it so - for themselves anyway.

More evidence of a payoff

For taxpayers, health tab may not end :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Terry Savage