Already Going For It
January 25th, 2009Obama promised he’d get busy and he has. Even if things like closing Guantanamo take time, he’s proven he’s committed to it.
Here are a few other ways President Obama is kicking ass:
Slate: A Presumption of Disclosure (via: Airbag)
NYTimes: Obama Reverses Rules on U.S. Abortion Aid
NY Times: On His First Full Day, Obama Tackles Sobering Challenges
I’m hopeful that the Obama Administration’s actions can make people like Limbaugh, Savage, Beck and Hannity more irrelevant than they already are. Not a single one of them has proposed reasonable solutions to our future.
Maybe I’m still remembering the rancor about Clinton in 1992-3. It was everywhere in Utah. This time feels different. I’m trying not to gloat around family members who did not vote for Obama. I don’t feel like I have to defend his election.
Yesterday he said:
Naturally, this scares some people who, even in the face of a clearly broken system, won’t let go of the fear of things like universal health care or spending more money on our own infrastructure (instead of Iraq’s).
There are all kind of criticisms for FDR and how handled or mishandled policy during the Great Depression. This article talks about ways we can move forward. Since the dialogue about the inauguration was extremely civil, I’m wondering how people are feeling about the coming stimulus package. Of note from the linked article:
“Perhaps most important, the New Deal brought Americans federal unemployment and old-age insurance, which not only rendered later downturns less severe but made Americans less dependent on the fickle largesse of their employers, if only ever so slightly. And here, too, the Obama administration might take one final historical lesson: Roosevelt’s advisers wanted to establish public health care as part of their program to protect Americans from ‘economic insecurity’ but left it out in anticipation of opposition. Let’s have hope this new New Deal can be bolder.”
Bolder. One can hope. I still can’t believe ailing companies aren’t screaming for health care help. If I were General Motors, that’s the first place I’d be asking for help from the government. But I’m not General Motors and General Motors is clearly not me.
Finally, from the Slate link above:
“It’s not a revolution—except that, after the last eight years, restoration is revolutionary.”
And it feels good. o
Tags: FDR, New Deal, New Deal 2.0?, Obama Presidency, politics
I don’t know about you, Jon, but after the past eight years, I’m still having trouble believing I’m awake. I just watched the President’s weekly address … and got chills. Not douche chills, like I’ve had for eight years; real, honest to goodness, “This is my President. America rocks.” chills.
And I’m with you in hoping that the voices of the extreme right get drowned out in favor of actually making the progress that’s being discussed.
I’m one of the Johnny-Come-Lately’s who didn’t vote for President Obama (I didn’t vote at all – shame on me!), but I totally agree with DaddyScratches. Action is good! Inaction and ignorance are bad. The first 100 days aren’t going to be a picnic for a LOT of people. On the flip side though, how wonderful that things are being discussed, considered, debated and worked on!
I can’t believe business isn’t screaming for health premiums either. I know that just in my department we could hire two more people for what the company is spending on health premiums. I wouldn’t mind having $900/month left in my paycheck to throw around either. Talk about a stimulus. More workers, more money in worker’s pockets. It seems like the best way to get our nation humming again.
Frankly, I’m just blissed the fuck out.
I thought about replying Jon, but I know it’s fruitless. You agree with what he is doing, I don’t. In fact, all week I’ve managed to barely contain my displeasure…but alas, only time will tell who is right and wrong on these actions he is taking.
All I have to ask is this…if you’re ok with his plans regarding Gitmo, you tell me where they’re gonna go. How about Utah?
I for one don’t care if they were/are tortured. I trust our CIA and believe they know better than you or I who is a real danger to this country. After 9/11 I can’t believe anyone would even remotely question that. But maybe 9/11 is just a faded memory for you now.
Anyway…we disagree in every way imaginable regarding Obama. And as I told a liberal friend this week…there is not need to rebuild this country or to fix a broken system. Many of us are fine with the way the country has been run, through the past two and half centuries and don’t want it changed.
And, I must remind you…not everyone on the left is happy with Obama. Some of these actions are more rhetoric than anything…appeasement some may are calling it.
Lastly, why can you have your liberal media talking heads and the conservatives can’t? I tolerate MSNBC, HuffPo, the NYT, Village Voice and all the others…
Ok, I said too much already. You are in your zone…me in mine and never the two shall meet. And that’s ok (unless he screws us all over big time…then perhaps we might agree, lol).
I’m just incredibly thankful the whole Bush ordeal is over. We are finally accomplishing things that are helpful to real people, instead of wicked puppet cronies. I AM hesitant about the economic package he’s prepared, as I wonder how much it will really work. But I am hopeful that it will work, or at least get us going in the right direction.
I cannot tell you the relief I feel watching the news and not hearing about the latest evil mastermind plan. I think I’m still in shock that Bush is gone, really. :p
When I saw this I thought it might let you in on how the other side is viewing things, LOL.
Yes, my objections to “universal health care” and “infrastructure” are rooted in my “fear” of what’s good for me! Thank God, Obama will save me from myself!
Brave. As usual.
Clearly, your “smug asshattery” is intact! Good for you!
Try to start a business and offer your employees health care lately?
Umm, what?
Maybe your belief in this stuff is emotional, but my opposition isn’t. There are _reasons_ to think these spending plans are a bad idea. Maybe those are wrong, or badly thought out, or inaccurate, but you ought to know those reasons and have answers for them.
And if you can’t take a joke about the Obama cult, you’re taking yourself too seriously.
Your opposition seems very rooted in reason. Especially with all the big words and stuff.
I can take a joke. Can you? Smug Asshat is a joke.
I’m a smug asshat here 150% of the time. It’s in the EULA.
Also, I’m not psychic yet, so I can’t read your mind about your reasons for your thinking. Which is why I’d love for you to explain yourself minus the smug asshattery. I’ve tried to do it in my responses to people on this thread.
While I _could_ take a joke, my fealty to Lord Cheney forbids recognition of mocking humor.
It’s a meta comment. Why just presume that anyone who disagrees with Obama does so from fear? Devices like contrasting a “clearly broken system” with folks who “won’t let go of the fear” don’t really suggest much openness of mind. You don’t need to be a psychic to be curious about why people don’t see things the way you do.
For myself, I think I know the arguments for Obama’s policies better than most of his supporters. I certainly know their views better than they know mine.
You are brilliant. At being a troll.
I am so freaking proud of him. For me, and for many other adults and countless children, he is a real hero.
Tears come to my eyes every time I hear “President Obama” or see even a photo of him since Inauguration.
And no, I don’t think he’s a messiah or that he will “fix everything”. But I believe he’s going to try to fix as much as he can.
My sentiments exactly. Every single word, including the tears part.
My objections to universal health care are more related to my father-in-law (hereto referred as FIL), a general practitioner who is already struggling as it is. Consider this:
My FIL is known in this area as being a great doctor. He not only takes time to help you with whatever your current ailment is, but also takes time to make a plan of action for your life in order to keep you in the best health permanently. If a universal health-care system is pushed, his standard of care will have to decrease in order to meet a demand of new patients which he would be legally responsible to see.
Now, from my own personal experience of being in a health care system that would most likely be the model for our universal system (i.e. military health care) I can offer up the following information. If you go into the ER for something like an ear infection (something I had chronically when I was younger) you can expect to wait, at a minimum, of 3 hours before you are even seen. This is of course despite the fact that you are in a lot of pain. When you are finally seen, they treat only the infection and make no indication that you should see a specialist for this issue. Instead they tell you that this sort of thing happens a lot. You go on life not being any wiser and assume that all is well.
Transition to 15 years later, where I now have a condition in my ear, which for all intensive purposes was completely preventable and ended up in a 19K surgery, thankfully I have insurance through my employer which covered that.
I’m sure I can hear the argument that with universal health care all would be well, but the truth of the matter would be, that I would end up waiting 6 months to a year until I could have a surgery. The effects would more than likely end up leaving me deaf, or with meningitis eventually leading to my death.
I know it seems like an end all service, but substandard care only leads to more problems.
I agree that the health care system is broken, but I believe the answer is to deal with making it more affordable. Find what caused it to be so expensive in the first place. 50 years ago, you only had health insurance for surgery, everyday visits you settled up with the doctor right then and there. Something has happened between now and then that caused the problems.
I don’t disagree with your points. I think we need to look at Germany. They have a combination system, where the state provides healthcare, but if you choose, or your employer chooses, they can offer healthcare or you can purchase private insurance.
I’m not sure I believe your arguments about waiting 6 months for a procedure. That may or may not be the case.
Wouldn’t the ideal situation be that you wouldn’t have had to go to an ER, but be able to see a doctor instead? You are underscoring the broken system. People go to ER for things that should be treated by a normal doctor. Unless I’m missing something in your story…
The problem is deep; administrative costs (30% of the total cost of healthcare in the U.S.!!), technology, and pressure from insurance companies for physicians to see as many patients as possible in the shortest amount of time.
I’ll tell you what a real problem in the health arena is, lawsuits. Did you know that a gynecologist has to make 250K before he can even start earning a dime just to pay his insurance premiums? Because of the risk of getting sued, the quality of health care goes out the window and the costs go up. I’d be a fan of seeing health insurance go back to what it used to be, for major things only.
I wish my argument about waiting 6 months for surgery was illegitimate, but it is true. My sister in-laws ex-boyfriend was from Sweden and had hurt his shoulder while swimming. He was told that he wouldn’t be seen for 6 months. He came to the states and had the surgery within a week.
And while your correct about people going to an ER for things that they shouldn’t, going back to the military health care that I had, even if you were in there for a legitimate reason, you were waiting a long time before you were ever seen.
Heck, go as recently to the Walter Reed fiasco a few years ago. Here are the heroes of our day recieving worse treatment than you’d get in a 3rd world country. If that’s how a government run health care system treats its defenders, what makes you think you’d receive any better treatment.
I don’t disagree that health care is a huge issue, I just disagree that more government is the solution.
You’ll note that I suggested we take a look at Germany. “More government” is an extremely simplistic way to view an enormously complex issue.
Lawsuits (and malpractice insurance) make up less than 1% of the cost of healthcare. I HIGHLY recommend you let go of your conservative talking points and take a hard look at this:
http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/rp/healthcare/accounting_cost_healthcare.asp
ABC News did a piece about what contributes to health care costs in the U.S. and cited this report.
I’d also like to mention that I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS. But sitting round quoting morons from talk radio isn’t going to move us forward.
I agree that being a doctor right now in the U.S. is not good. High education costs and insurance copmany contracts are stopping many from becoming doctors. I heard a story recently about a doctor who left the insurance program behind and charges a yearly subscription fee to patients for his services. He sees fewer patients, but spends much longer time with them and their base fee includes a rigorous series of exams and followup.
Just so you know, the insurance we have as a family isn’t family insurance. It’s high deductible catastrophic insurance managed through the state of Utah by a private firm. Because that private firm is a monopoly in Utah, I cannot negotiate financial terms per visit with my doctors. I have to pay the fee the insurance company negotiated. I pay those fees until my high deductible is met (along with any medical emergencies and their associated fees) and then an 80/20 kicks in. We can afford it, but it’s not ideal. I does stop us from visiting the doctor for minor things, though.
We’ve got a long way to go.
I appreciate the article. I’ll def take a look at it. My source for my “talking point” didn’t come from Hannity or the other retards on talk radio, but a bulletin that was in a doctors office I visited for all my ear crap.
That sucks about the insurance that you guys have. I know it’s got to be difficult dealing with that on a regular basis. I have insurance and sometimes I want to reach the phone and drop kick the people on the other end.
Glad to see you bookmarked that link I sent. The MGI is a goldmine.
As one who voted third party this time around, I was very impressed with Obama’s transition. But since election , I have had several issues, some with the President and some with his supporters.
First , It seems to me, and many others that we are in “Meet the new Boss” situation. Where is the outrage at this ?
I assume that wasn’t the reason Obama supporters were crying when they heard him on TV.
How can we possibly consider the $850 billion an investment in infrastructure ? I fault the house Dems more than Obama on this. Has anyone really looked at where this money is going? It ain’t infrastructure.
What about the pledge to not appoint lobbyists? William Lynn?
What about the Hope of a less corrupt Govt.? Timothy Geithner?
And as far as these wishes hoping to silence opposition ? What if that had been said about you during the past 8 years ?
What alternatives did the Dem controlled congress offer during the past 2 ? Except to continuing to fund the Iraq effort ?
There are still no new ideas from either side. Each ideology is applying is worn out, corruption soaked play books that they have used for the past 50 years. So far there has been no Change of even any hint of it. From either side.
The Parties have let down the people no matter where they fall on the political spectrum. I fear it is going to take a economic apocalypse to make us realize it.
I hope Obama supporters begin to hold him to the standards that they Bush to. They deserve it.
It looks like I can’t insert hyperlinks anymore.
I was questioning where the outrage was about this : http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/01/obama-sides-wit.html
I disagree with Obama’s take on the warrantless wiretapping and the immunity. And I’m upset about it continuing.
I didn’t say that Obama was perfect. I have never held that opinion. I’m just pleased that he’s moving forward in many areas and doing so quickly.
On the wiretapping case, not sure if you meant outrage from the left or right…I assume left since Obama is siding with Bush on this.
My take on such things is that Obama got a real intelligence briefing (which none of us are privy to) and found out the reasoning behind why Bush did what he did.
That’s the thing that kills me about people hating Bush…and I was not a fan myself. He was the president…aware of so much more than any of us could every imagine in terms of security and threats to this country. That was his job…and is the job of every president…to keep us safe, without causing undo worry and concern. The burden of carrying around what real threats there are and how to deal with them fall on few. I think it best to consider that we have not had any more attacks on this country since 9/11 under Bush.
Considering the extent of 9/11, I don’t think anyone can take that away from Bush. His tactics might seem extreme, but then again, killings hundreds of innocent people with giant airplanes is also a bit extreme. We live in a different world…I think it’s time for the left to realize that and stop being so high and mighty.
faydean, we do live in a different world. However, what are we fighting for if we act just like the fundamentalist extremists who have attacked us? If we let go of acting high and mighty, we sink; we become our own enemy.
My hatred of the past eight years is that Bush allowed his Secretary of Defense personal hubris about Saddam Hussein to cloud the goal of capturing Osama Bin Laden. Bush allowed his Vice President and a squad of venal lawyers (who represent the worst in us) to perform legal gymnastics and justify horrible acts.
Cheney & Rumsfeld were around post-Watergate and saw what happened to the office of the Presidency once the President went too far and broke many laws. They spent their time remaking an office of the President who can act as a monarch. That same hubris lead to the outing of Valerie Plame, certainly a treasonous act, 9/11 or not.
I agree with you that one of the President’s jobs is to protect the people. My question? At what cost?
I would argue Jon that despite your hatred of Cheney and Rumsfeld, you are not in the loop of intelligence for the U.S. Government. No matter what the news reports…the bits and pieces we see of this or that “horrible” act, I would dare say there is gigantic issue behind it all that we know nothing of…and don’t want to.
If you take a look at history…read the papers released after various wars and presidencies, you will find that we simply didn’t know the truth. I don’t think the truth is necessarily always kept from the American people due to some underhanded purpose…I think it’s for the security of our nation. Bay of Pigs is a good example. None of us knew at the time how close we came to nuclear war with Cuba. And again, I argue, nor should we.
I’m sorry if it sounds like I’m heartless or whatever, but if it’s a case of them or me…well it’s gonna be them. The thing that bothers me alot about Iraq, and I did not support us going, is that people totally dismiss what Saddam did to his own people for years and years. And yes, I’m fully aware of our role in funding him in the beginning of his reign. But nonetheless, the man was evil. Yes, we’re in a war that is not necessarily clear cut in it’s purpose, but I do see why we are there at least on a few points. And my biggest thing now is that once we are in, we can’t just walk away. We must support our troops, a an all volunteer military, that has chosen to be there. And do you honestly think if we leave now that the area won’t go into chaos within months? I know it will…so do you deep down. But the argument over the ethics of it seem to keep getting in your way.
War is hell. It’s not fair or easy or right necessarily. But after much research and watching, I wholly feel that the Islamic threat to not only us, but the free world in general, is so great, we can’t do enough to be defensive…or offensive for that matter.
They want us dead Jon.
If I thought you could be open minded to considering this side, I’d give you information on what is going on in Europe regarding radical Islam etc.
I’m sorry, but at what cost? Well, like I said, it’s them or us at this point. I honestly don’t think this issue can be dealt with by diplomacy and rational consideration in terms of the degree of threat there is. But that is just my view. I don’t think people are considering this enough actually. We’ve become complacent with no more attacks on our soil (though we’ve seen plenty worldwide in seven years).
Can you not throw a bone to Bush that some of what he did kept us SAFE the past seven years. I can, and I’m not his fan at all. And if you can, then can’t you consider he had reasons for doing some of what he did that you simply are too biased to see?
If you think Bush has “kept us safe” by his actions, you have grossly misread the current situation.
Then give me examples, on our own soil, of a major act of terrorism in the last seven years.
I don’t care about the rhetoric and threats from abroad…they can bite me.
If you feel we’re unsafe, then prove to me how Bush made that so…we are no more unsafe now than we were before 9/11…I’d say it’s about the same level actually. But, something (hmm, wonder what) kept those threats at bay after 9/11…I seem to recall major terrorists being caught by us globally (and housed at Gitmo!) and many acts of terrorism thwarted both here and internationally.
The idea that Bush’s policies made our enemies our enemies is absolutely crazy. Whether he’d been president or not, these people would have hated us anyway. They will hate us under Obama. It does not matter WHO is president.
Obama cowtowing to our enemies (We’re sorry…we’ve not been nice) will only make it more unsafe for us. While you are upset over what Bush supposedly did (which I never get a clear cut answer as to what exactly he did that pisses so many off), Obama pandering to these people who want us to be obliterated infuriates me.
Only time will tell who is more successful in protecting this country. And if something major happens, I dare to say that Obama will perhaps show a bit more Bush like policies in response. Funny how defending yourself will do that.
And what about the almost 100,000 Iraq cilvilians who have been killed since we invaded? Don’t you think that’s a little extreme as well?
Faydean, I’ll give you that since 9/11, there have not been any further attacks on the US, you have to ask yourself, “At what cost?”
Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Therefore I ask the question, does giving up rights to due process and legal proceedings for safety enhance our freedom?
It doesn’t. Neither does the Patriot Act. People do not realize, that we’ve unwittingly given the government the power to use a new legal precedent to declare any individual a terrorist, and thereby restrict any rights that person has. It could come down to simply being a political dissident that deems you be declared a terrorist. At that point, the government can deny you due process, strip your rights as a US citizen and hold you indefinitely without trial.
The fact that Obama for all of his wanting to change how Bush has done things, coupled with the fact that he has degree in Constitutional law from one of our lands most prestigious universities does not give me hope.
The idea of a REAL intelligence briefing allowing a president to sway from a document he has sworn an oath to protect appalls me as it should anyone.
Now, as far as arguments about motivations of the extremists who attacked us, one need not go far to find out what they were. Read the 9/11 commission report. Look at history. See where our meddling in the affairs of other sovereign nations has given the extremists more than enough to declare a holy war against us. For God’s sake, we not only trained Osama, we gave him all the resources he needed to defeat the communist threat in Afghanistan. Where did that get us?
I’m sorry, but I don’t buy it.
All the talk of the Constitution being defended and such. Just on this one point huh? Because those of us on the right feel the Constitution is being tromped all over by the liberal agenda towards socializing this country.
Funny how the Constitution comes up when it’s about dealing with combatants of this country (they are not U.S. Citizens therefore not due such rights under our Constitution), but when it comes to other civil liberties it’s a pick and choose kind of thing by the left. You guys see civil liberties only from the perspective of those you deem socially in the minority. To hell with the rest of us. Not exactly what our Constitution addresses from my interpretation.
The Patriot Act is no different than any other legislation passed during a time of war regarding treason. Where did you get information that the U.S. can strip anyone of their rights in this country under this Act? Give me proof or an example.
I won’t even entertain the comment about the attacks on the U.S. being justified by our past actions. There IS NO justification for 9/11…what the hell did the innocent people in those towers, on those planes and in the Pentagon have to do with our past actions!!!??? I suppose you find a justification for Pearl Harbor by the Japanese too? If so, then maybe you shouldn’t be arguing the merits of the Constitution since you yourself don’t seem to be a patriot of this country.
Are we a country innocent of wrong doing? No. But I’d hold our integrity up against any other country in the world. But, perhaps, that is the real difference between you and I.
To put your distaste for the Patriot Act, which you hold Bush responsible for in some negative way, into perspective. Before making quick judgements, best to put things into perspective.
Note the Smith Act passed by FDR…still on the books of U.S. law, though deemed unconstitutional…after being upheld by the Supreme Court prior.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Act
Apples to Oranges. Typical straw man argument AND against the TOS.
You can’t defend what you don’t understand.
Then, respectfully Jon, you explain to me how the Patriot Act is not like any other treason/sedition legislation ever passed in a time of war, besides it being specific to terrorism.
And why is FDR not horrible for passing the Smith Act since everyone seems to say Bush is? Do you not think both presidents had motivating factors for passing both pieces of legislation, namely war?
I seriously would like to know why, if you enjoy the debate, you open up these threads, only to attack pretty mean spiritedly any commenter who dissents from the popular view? I truly don’t get it.
My point is opposing, sure, and you don’t have to agree with it. But to name call and just simply call me whatever you want to other commenters seems to make you in violation of your own terms of service. Can you not see that point? A debate is not a debate if everyone agrees. I enjoy the discussion as much as anyone, but it is my take to defend my own views, not necessarily to sway or be swayed. Perhaps I misunderstood what you were looking for in opening up the comments. I know you disagree with me, I still consider your points…I just don’t embrace them. Nothing wrong with that I don’t think.
Why not take the idea, counter it and continue the discussion instead of saying things such as “just ignore faydean”? It seems to me that if you like the debate you would take part and counter instead of just accusing someone of being a fundmentalist etc.
What’s the point of asking opinions and encourage the discussion if you are only going to step in and tell everyone they’re douchebags for even seeing it from another point of view and expressing it?
Just wondering.
I didn’t think I was being too anything really in my responses, just giving my take and being honest. I read and consider what you write. So far, I’m not seeing something I can find common ground on you with. Doesn’t mean I won’t keep trying. You can’t be all bad, LOL. KIDDING.
I like how when you disagree with me, you immediately categorize me as being a leftist liberal. Funny seeing as I’m the complete opposite.
I’ve read the constitution and continue to do so on a repeated basis. If you’d like, I could quote section by section all the areas where bush failed and also where congress has fallen short. I could go through and give you each little nook and crany. I don’t look to minority situations in order to see my civil liberties. Unlike you though, I don’t see the civil liberties as negotiable during any circumstance.
Now, I never used the constitution to justify releasing terrorists or what not. However, when a US citizen is declared a terrorist under the Patriot Act, and their constitutionally protected rights are immediately forfeit prior to a trial by jury, then I have a major problem. You know, the whole precedence our country has of being innocent until proven guilty? Or maybe you’d rather we just take a page out of the Facist handbook and start rounding up anyone with Gestapo like tactics? Thought so.
The difference between the Patriot Act and other legislation passed during times of war, is that officially, and constitutionally speaking, we are not in a time of war. Read your constitution. Only Congress can declare war, which they didn’t. Legally, we are not at war, so don’t try to pawn off the Patriot Act as a wartime legislation.
While I agree that 9/11 was a deplorable act, we need to entertain our enemies reasons for attaching us seeing as they believe it to be a war. If you’d like to get into all sorts of acts that were similar, look at what we did to Japan in a time of war. We dropped two separate bombs that created destruction that made 9/11 look like a picnic. Granted, we had the good graces to at least warn them, but the lives that were taken were civilian. The point is, in times of war, civilians become expendable. To our enemies, that’s exactly what the towers represented.
You ask the question, are we a country innocent of wrong doing and you correctly answer no. While our integrity may be better than others, we still need to be willing to face the consequences of our decisions.
Well, if we agreed, then I suppose we’d both consider ourselves conservative…but since you are coming from a very unconservative viewpoint regarding war and civil rights of enemies, I’d dare say you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
I know alot of veterans, and most would not easily concede that one think of their enemy before themself in a time of war.
Sorry, the technicality of whether Congress officially declared war back seven years ago has been hashed out. You know better that the President holds ultimate authority on taking military action and declaring war is a semantical point. He didn’t need Congress to do what he did. So be it. Now whether you agree with that is moot. I think most Americans, and most importantly the soldiers serving the U.S. in this war, would say we are at war. My first respect goes to the soldiers dying in this war, not to the enemies, official or civilian.
As a U.S. citizen I don’t ever “entertain” an enemy’s reasoning for acts of agression to my home country on my home soil. Sorry, I just think that, well, serves in NOT supporting my country. I mean it makes me feel better I suppose, less guilt ridden and such, but it doesn’t serve to protect my family and countrymen from harm.
Sure, the bombs on Japan were a bit more impactful than 9/11…but why not compare apples to oranges when talking of such things…hell why not. Let’s see, in WWII you had a nation tyranizing half the globe, killing off millions in a socially spawned genocide…and another nation, smaller than most of our own states, doing the same on the other half of the globe…just not as efficiently as Hitler. If I remember my history correctly, Japan intended to ‘never surrender”…even if that meant killing off every man able to fight in their own country (they have a whole history of the samurai culture fueling them). What choice did we have? You say we were nice enough to warn them. Yes, we were. We told them and told them that we would have to crush them if they refused to surrender. And does that make us horrible? Why does it? Because we defended ourselves from THEIR initial, unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor…when not even a week or so before the Japanese lied to us and told us they were not our enemy.
How you can conclude that the Middle East and Islam is not our enemy, I don’t know. And I’ve read the Patriot Act and see nowhere in it that states a U.S. citizen would be stipped of civil liberties. It does say over and over “alien”…”immigrant”. Last time I checked, those people do not have civil liberties under our Constitution. Perhaps, you are a bit paranoid about such things.
Either way, we disagree. I’d like you tell the family members of 9/11 that their families need to face the consequences of what their country did as their dead family members died just for going to work that fateful day. Was it one action of ours that killed them or many. Why don’t you list them for their benefit…see what their response would be.
Preach it!
steve-o, don’t waste your time with faydean.
She’s as fundamentalist as Osama. You can’t have a rational discussion with somebody who can’t look past rigid ideology and whose world view is tainted in every way by a machine (there is nothing to compare what the Screaming Conservative wing has on the other side) by the inability to use any form of logic when discussing issues. None of the talking heads ever has a rational, calm discussion where opposing viewpoints are given a respectful listen and process where the best idea wins. It’s all about MY views being right and your views being WRONG.
I may be a lefty, but I can sure as hell criticize bad moves made by members of the party I vote for. This seems to be the biggest problem with conservatives these days; the inability to take responsibility for their harmful views and policies. And then the audacity to bitch about solutions to the problems they and there ideas caused.
Jon, I could easily say the same about you.
So, there ya go. No point in opening up a discussion (unless of course everyone agrees with you).
I’d like to share this link…trying to pass it as far as I can with great hope….
It’s to get a Secretary of the Arts
[link removed from this off-topic comment]
While I appreciate the effort, this is spam. Please stay on topic. I’ve removed the URL. If you’d like to suggest a link or story idea, email is the best way to contact me.
Just an admin note: Replies only go 6 deep. If you’ve asked for a reply at the end of a thread, there is no way for someone to reply to you.
Blurb doesn’t want to react to a point about how he dismisses his opponents? You’re a troll.
Blurb doesn’t want to respond to your points? You’re a “fundamentalist” and “irrational”, and there isn’t any point in discussing things with you.
There is no point in discussing substance with you, because you’d sooner dismiss a critic than admit they have a point you can’t answer. Of course, an observer might wonder if you are _right_ about these things, and that critiques like this just rhetorical cover now that we’ve been found out. That’s the problem with these behaviors, they just devolve to shouting.
But I’m talking to _you_, and I’m worried about _you_. This habit of thought leads to closed minds and uncuriousity and shriveled hearts. I don’t give a rat’s ass for the politics of a vanity blog. I do care what ends up happening to _you_. You are installing a political agenda as religious ideology, and it won’t be good for you. Seriously, how is possible that 40% of the country believes things that are just plain stupid? Do you truly think we are all that dumb?
Go read Orwell’s “Politics of the English Language” to see the risks. Seriously, if your politics lead you to pride and uncharity, doesn’t that suggest there’s a problem with your approach?
What are you talking about?
_You_ haven’t made ANY points. _You_ use a fake name to comment here.
faydean, on the other hand, has sent numerous emails outside of these discussions, and has tried to reach out in kind ways (which might belie her strong views publicly shared here).
Nobody, you haven’t made a point other than a few snarky (and well-played) remarks. Fundamentalism goes both ways. There are liberal fundamentalists and conservative fundamentalists. There are good ideas from across the spectrum.
I’ve got a post coming up that I’ll open up for commentary that will prove every one of the digs you just made against me as false. Please hold.
I’ve published my name here previously, but it was a while ago and I suppose there is no reason you would recall it. I use a pseudonym because I don’t always geta lot of time to think through comments like these. I have emailed you occasionally, for whatever that is worth.
And I’m talking about how people talk about politics, rather than the politics themselves. Again, it’s a meta comment.