I don’t know what would one be doing working as a blacksmith?
I say Hannity’s place is Used Car Salesmen: he’ll tell you whatever lie he thinks you want to hear, and it won’t necessarily be the same lie he told yesterday. It may well contradict the lie he told you yesterday, in fact. I know this because I’ve watched his show here and there. What makes you think he’d be a blacksmith?
Or a senator or President, for that matter. Only the most cowardly and ignorant of the 20% of Americans who didn’t know Bush was an utter failure would vote for him. If they could figure out how.
Which is to say that you’re using your political impotence (thrown away on a third party) as an excuse to complain about whoever wins (pre-emptively done by complaining about both sides).
Don’t worry, that’s the approach I intend to take too - impotent complaining FTW!
Evidence suggests that it is possible for governments to run UHC effectively.
Oddly enough, most folks don’t have too much of a problem figuring out where I’m coming from. You are exceptional, in that regard. Perhaps “special” is the better word.
My position on futile, immoral and ruinously expensive wars is a matter of public record. Unless you mean something else?
"What would a senator or the President be doing selling used cars? "
I wasn’t inferring Hannity or whomever you mentioned was a blacksmith. I was inferring that former President’s actually had a trade prior to becoming President (as it should be)
Sorry you missed it.
It would mean anything that the government proposes for the greater good.
ObamaCare
Iraq War
etc etc
I’m trying to actually get a stance out of you instead of the (sometimes witty) one line answers that reveal nothing about your intentions other than to stir things up.
You stated:“True of just about every human endeavor since the dawn of time. What’s your point? A human endeavor under the auspices of a government is no more, nor any less likely to fail.”
In response to me stating that the government cannot always run things effectively.
To me, that means that as long as a moral obligation has been met with the government’s proposal, you will back it?
If it has a chance at failure(as you freely admit), why do you choose to rush it through and not thoroughly examine/make changes/debate it?
Why would you willingly place a burden on the people simply to see if the idea works or not?
I find it interesting that you bring up “rushing it through”. The thing is, Obama chose to rush through healthcare reform for reasons that seemed odd at the time but now seem almost prescient- that the right-wing talkboxes would come up with all sorts of ridiculous objections.
“It’s a Nazi health reform!”
“You’re turning this into a socialist country!”
“Death panels!”
“Obama will abort babies and grandmothers!”
If you want things to stop being rushed, tell your fellow conservatives to take back their movement from the idiots.
I am less so, believe me.
Rush it through? Hell, we’ve been talking about health care reform issues for years and years! I had national health insurance as a debating issue in high school, arguing by kerosene light! Ronald Reagan offered doom and gloom prophecy about Medicare in the early 60’s. If a time line that exceeds 40 years is your idea of “rushing it through”, I must say, you take the loooong view.
Have you some compulsion to wildly oversimplify positions that don’t accord with your own? Perhaps thats where you’re having your problem understanding me, you are assuming I’m an idiot. Got a lot of faults, its a long damn list, but “stupid” ain’t on it!
Point of fact, I do feel a moral obligation, but that isn’t strictly necessary. Even in the cold dead light of realpolitik, isn’t a healthy and productive citizenry the first goal of a nation? If for no other reason so that we can resist being overrun by lean and hungry barbarians from Canada?
Can the task be performed adequately by profit-seeking enterprises? Perhaps, but it sure as hell isn’t being done. I am heartsick and angry that my fellow Americans are being buggered by spreadsheets, that good people are ruined by the callous indifference of the profit motive. These are our people, yes? And if they are not, then who’s people are they?
Is the goal impossible? Doesn’t seem to be, other countries seem to manage rather well, their citizens have come on board and told us so! Are they lying, do you think? Treachery afoot, hoping to drag us down to their level of socialist misery?
So, we have a thing that needs be done, a thing that others are doing pretty well. Are you worried that we might fail? Then we figure out what is wrong, fix it, and then succeed!
Isn’t that what Americans do? If not us, who? If not now, when?
Relax. I just ate an entirely acceptable cheese sandwich.
I thought they were all well-insulated from eating poutine.
I don’t know of many ‘fellow conservatives’ that are currently in office. Unless you are referring to Republicans as conservatives.
Why is it hard to comprehend that maybe, just maybe, many Americans are on board with health care reform BUT they want it done right? As can be evidenced by the recent downturn of the support, people aren’t willing to just go along for the sake of going along.
For someone so self absorbed into thinking they aren’t stupid, (in any regard) you sure spout some stupidity from time to time.
I am not defending political machinations for the sake of the party, you are.
I am not accepting of the political correctness for the sake of the party, you are.
I am not voting the party line for the sake of the party, you are.
ALL under the guise of “for the greater good of the people”. Look, I have no doubt that you want to better society as a whole and you’ll just have to take my word for it, that I want to as well.
What we disagree on is how to accomplish that goal. You would rather they push through an agenda and let it fail. I would rather they fail-proof the agenda and then push it through. (That might come with concessions, GEE IMAGINE THAT)
They seem to think they’re conservatives. If they’re not, perhaps you need to take back your party first.
Not sure if fail-proofing the agenda is possible. Insisting on it being fail-proof prior to implementation is a pretty good way of ensuring that the status quo is never abandoned, though. And there certainly exist powerful players who see it as in their best interests that the status quo remain.
Personally, I’d prefer that we scrap the whole shebang where it stands, and just go to single-payer. But I’m realistic enough to know that it’s not going to happen in one fell swoop. If getting there incrementally is what it’s going to take, it’s what I’ll have to support.
There’s nothing fail-proof in the world.
I never disagreed with this statement. Regardless, I tend to listen to a candidate and vote based upon merit, not some tag line above their head.
“There’s nothing fail-proof in the world.”
I agree but we can get a whole lot closer than what was/is being proposed. Incremental steps is fine (which is why they scrapped single payer). The incremental steps shouldn’t start at T and move to Z, it should start at A and move to B.
What was/is being proposed? Give a precis.
From what I’ve seen, the recent downturn in support could just as easily by evidence that people are frightened and confused by a massive misinformation campaign. When I put on the TV, I don’t see a lot of objective informative information that could actually help people to come to an intelligent position.
The American people are capable of intelligently weighing the positions and forming intelligent opinions. Statements like “keep government away from my Medicare” are evidence that some aren’t doing that. IMHO the reason they aren’t doing that is because they are being fed bullshit rather than anything resembling facts.