You forgot to include “one of the pioneers of using affirmative action in federal employment and contracting” and “creator of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
Haven’t read any of 'em, never said I did…therefore no need for citation. I oppose it vehemently, as should be obvious from many posts around here, on a philosophical basis best summed up by one of my favorite quotes by Scylla, who said "This is that land of the motherfucking free. Home of the brave," and people are not free when they have to go hat in hand to the government seeking to have their needs provided for.
I also oppose it because I firmly believe that it’s a foot-in-the-door that will lead to total government health care and life-and-death decisions being left to government fiat – a government that is unaccountable to no one and can do (and cover or deny) whatever it wants on the basis of this or that day’s revenue or politics.
But I acknowledge that certain other people may not share this view and would like to see some sort of helpful government assistance with their health care, and these are the people who are beginning to turn from supporting ObamaDemCongress care because it’s so chaotic, ill-conceived and hurried, and I applaud them for having the good sense to question its feasability and to begin to realize that “It’s better than nothing” is not a good enough reason to upset the current health care system in which the vast majority of the country’s citizens are happy with the plan and the care they have.
Why is that? Do you dispute that the average voter is a dummy? Why does it mean they’re in trouble? No snark, I just don’t get what you’re saying.
And “rushing through”? We’ve been arguing about this for years! Hell, when I was in high school, that was the topic for the debate team. IIRC, that was the year I lost $20 betting against that young upstart, Cassius Clay!
No stupid. I’m saying that the opposition people at the current town halls who decide to stand up and ask a question are angry and uninformed. I have two cites for that. 
Good try on the handwaving, though. I understand your desire to ignore an issue that suggests that your side is full of cretins.
That would be “Hoe-down”. You clearly have been exposed to too much urbanity and too little Li’l Abner and “Oklahoma”. 
Oh yes. If Nixon were running for President now under the exact same policies, Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter et al. would surely be calling him a dangerous socialist liberal who was soft on terror (shook hands with the COMMUNIST CHINESE, don’t forget). It’s instructive to look at what was considered orthodox conservative thought in the US pre-Reagan, I think.
It used to be said that “what’s called liberal now will be called conservative in forty years.” By any stretch of the imagination fiscal politics in the US has traveled in exactly the opposite direction: Nixon’s (admittedly Keynesian-leaning) economic policies were accepted if not embraced by 70’s conservatives and now would be shunned by even most of the center-left Dems. Could you imagine the outrage from both parties if Obama suggested wage and price freezes?
SA:
So when you write,
- “And so we see the need for Congress’ attempt to rush, rush, rush it into passage without even knowing what’s in it. They knew it couldn’t stand the light of day, and sure enough, the more that people find out about it and the more they consider the future ramifications of it, the more they oppose it.”*
…you freely admit that, having not read anything of the bill yourself, you have in fact no fucking clue as to what it’s “future ramifications” might actually be. You just oppose it, with no real idea whatsoever as to what it actually contains.
The bill now in Congress was around while you were in high school? What does this make, your 44th year now?
How does it feel to have teachers younger than your children?
I freely admit no such thing. They are two different animals. One doesn’t need to know the specific language of a particular bill in order to know and beware of the way that government in this country seeks to expand its control over our lives. One has only to look at the way government has managed to grow and assert itself over our lives during the last century and tax us accordingly to see that this is so.
I will tell you what I am coming to believe. I do not think democracy can survive the information delivery systems now available to modern societies. For democracy to function – and by that, I mean for it to be a source of wise, benevolent policy – it requires a well educated, well informed public. It’s citizens must be capable of rationality and critical reflection. After the last eight years, and now watching the very people who have the most to gain from UHC idiotically frittering away the opportunity out of sheer ignorance, it has become very clear to me that the majority of Americans do not posses these characteristics.
We try to be magnanimous, we say, “Sure, there are reasonable objections to reforming the health care system…” But what are they? I’m still waiting for a single opponent of health care reform on these boards to lay out a clear, concise argument against it. I see nothing but the usual haughty drive-bys and mindless sloganeering that have been the modus operandi of the right here since the debacle of the Iraq invasion.
You’re right, elucidator: that shit works. But if works now, what will prevent it from working on the next generation as well?
Chomsky was/is wrong. He’s an idealist. Most people, on their own, are simply too stupid to make important political decisions – especially in American, which I submit is at this point in history the stupidest nation on the face of the Earth. (Exhibit A: Starving Artist. It is in fact amazing that his brain generates enough electricity to keep his fingers moving on the keyboard.)
If there is one thing I’ve learned from the right after all these years, it’s that people simply can’t be trusted to govern themselves.
Oh. You mean like Death Panels? Is that the kind of valuable information you and your retarded ilk has managed to glean out of the health reform bill without even having to know what’s in it?
SA:
Yes. You believe stuff. But you don’t know, because you haven’t actually bothered to look at what the bill actually contains. You just chose to firmly believe things without even bothering to see if those beliefs correspond, even vaguely, with reality.
I see.
At last we find room for agreement.
If you’re going to accuse people of stupidity in this way, you’d be well advised to use better grammar.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from the left over the last four decades and how people live and behave as a result, it’s that people simply can’t be trusted to govern themselves.
And now that we’ve found one area of agreement and one area of agreement in opposite, I must bid you all adieu. Work awaits.
The vast majority are not happy with our current health system. It is not even close.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/08/05/majority-of-americans-support-obama39s-healthcare-policy-reform-pol/
SA:
Do us one favor on your way out, will you?
Cram that stupid smiley face up your ass.
Thanks.
You are living your life dependent on mindless ideology.
What parts are making the government more in control of your life? Is forcing insurance companies to accept people with a pre-existing condition controlling your life? Is forcing insurance companies to price within an affordable range controlling your life? Is offering a public option as leverage to keep insurance rates low controlling your life? You have no need to purchase the public option, why would it be controlling your life?
You’re simply an automation screaming about the evils of the government and pretending you don’t depend on it every day.
Democracy isn’t a better form of government. It isn’t more effiicient, it isn’t smarter, it doesn’t make the trains run on time. It’s only more just.
I am not a “Dem”. In fact, I’m not even registered to vote.
Do you seriously believe that voters are turning against the health care bill because they know what’s in it? Of course not. The voters are turning against it because the Republicans have done a much better job of torpedoing it than the Democrats have of floating it.
Being scared into supporting torture isn’t very motherfucking brave, but that didn’t stop you and your kind (it staggers me that you, a torture apologist, laments the alleged lack of decency and civility in other people, but there it is) from cheering on the torturer Bush and arguing in favour of his policies of kidnap and torture. Criticizing a given policy because it isn’t in accordance with how you interpret your little motto is not only trivial, it’s terribly hypocritical of you.