Whom do you hope the GOP nominates for 2012?

[HughJass]

good speech by Ron Paul re the war mongering against Iran. I hope you folk get a president with his foreign policy ideas before it's too late

We hear war advocates today on the Floor scare-mongering about reports that in one year Iran will have missiles that can hit the United States. Where have we heard this bombast before? Anyone remember the claims that Iraqi drones were going to fly over the United States and attack us? These "drones" ended up being pure propaganda – the UN chief weapons inspector concluded in 2004 that there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein had ever developed unpiloted drones for use on enemy targets. Of course by then the propagandists had gotten their war so the truth did not matter much.

We hear war advocates on the floor today arguing that we cannot afford to sit around and wait for Iran to detonate a nuclear weapon. Where have we heard this before? Anyone remember then-Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice’s oft-repeated quip about Iraq, that we cannot wait for the smoking gun to appear as a mushroom cloud?

We need to see all this for what it is: Propaganda to speed us to war against Iran for the benefit of special interests.

Let us remember a few important things. Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has never been found in violation of that treaty. Iran is not capable of enriching uranium to the necessary level to manufacture nuclear weapons. According to the entire US Intelligence Community, Iran is not currently working on a nuclear weapons program. These are facts, and to point them out does not make one a supporter or fan of the Iranian regime. Those pushing war on Iran will ignore or distort these facts to serve their agenda, though, so it is important and necessary to point them out.

Some of my well-intentioned colleagues may be tempted to vote for sanctions on Iran because they view this as a way to avoid war on Iran. I will ask them whether the sanctions on Iraq satisfied those pushing for war at that time. Or whether the application of ever-stronger sanctions in fact helped war advocates make their case for war on Iraq: as each round of new sanctions failed to "work" – to change the regime – war became the only remaining regime-change option.

This legislation, whether the House or Senate version, will lead us to war on Iran. The sanctions in this bill, and the blockade of Iran necessary to fully enforce them, are in themselves acts of war according to international law. A vote for sanctions on Iran is a vote for war against Iran. I urge my colleagues in the strongest terms to turn back from this unnecessary and counterproductive march to war.

http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2010/0 ... ct-of-war/

 

[CCS]

If everyone is guaranteed a house and food and health care as part of the minimum standard of living (education too?), what motive will be left for them to work? Most people are perfectly content staying at home all day playing video games, especially if the government pays for their kids.

And they only need to work for one month to get the money to buy the video game. Then they can quit and enjoy the minimum standard of living for years to come. Maybe even go for a walk in the park since that is free too.

Seriously. The more free stuff there is, the less reason there is to work. I think the only free stuff should be the stuff we absolutely need to get ahead and get a job: K-12 education.

 

[Nene]

If everyone is guaranteed a house and food and health care as part of the minimum standard of living (education too?), what motive will be left for them to work? Most people are perfectly content staying at home all day playing video games, especially if the government pays for their kids.

And they only need to work for one month to get the money to buy the video game. Then they can quit and enjoy the minimum standard of living for years to come. Maybe even go for a walk in the park since that is free too.

Seriously. The more free stuff there is, the less reason there is to work. I think the only free stuff should be the stuff we absolutely need to get ahead and get a job: K-12 education.

Surviving in this country without a job is impossible, with or without universal healthcare.

 

[timbo]

Really? Then explain to us all exactly how Michael Moore is supposedly "misinformed". BE SPECIFIC.

I don't really remember anything specific from the film. But I remember that everything was dramatized to the degree where the absolute worst cases in the American health system were depicted.

ROTFLMAO!! Timbo, did you REALLY see Sicko, or did you just make that up about seeing it? Be honest, now!

Of course I saw it. Why would I lie about that? Quite frankly, the incredibly positive interviews in that movie don't match up with what I hear from friends in Canada. While I haven't really heard any horror stories from them, they don't seem to be very appreciative of their free health-care. If I recall correctly, my Canadian friend paid $1500 in taxes last year for his "free" health-care.

Where does it come from in Canada, the UK, France, and all those other countries? Where does it come from in CUBA, for God's sake?

I don't know where it comes from! One thing that Michael Moore left out of his "brilliant" film was a pay-stub from each of the individuals he interviewed about "free" health-care. My taxes are bad enough right now considering I'm dumping loads of cash into a social security fund that I will never see. I don't want to pay for someone else's health care on top of that. Here's the bottom line: There's no such thing as free health-care. I would rather just pay for my own policy and be done with it. Bryan, if you are so willing to pay for other people's health-care, why don't you pick up my next month's order of Proxiphen?

Cuba? You make me laugh! I can't believe you take that seriously! Do you really think that we are worse off than Cuba? Michael Moore got to see a beautiful hospital in the heart of Havana... As if Castro is going to let a bunch of American cameramen into his country and film what their actual hospitals are like. Think about it, it's laughable!

Why can all those other countries figure out how to make universal healthcare work, but _we_ can't figure out how to do it?? Hmmm? uke:

We will eventually. I always thought that the best fix for our system was to prevent lawyers from making malpractice suits against doctors and get the government to back away from insurance companies. That would have lowered costs and made health-care much more affordable than it is now. But what's done is done, and soon enough we will all be under a single payer.

 

[HughJass]

If everyone is guaranteed a house and food and health care as part of the minimum standard of living (education too?), what motive will be left for them to work?

ambition?
curiosity?
a desire to achieve and create things?
satisfation from doing work which helps other people?
a desire to buy things they couldn't afford from being on welfare?

Most people are perfectly content staying at home all day playing video games, especially if the government pays for their kids.

so why don't most people stay at home playing video games in countries that have a welfare state which entitles them to a whole heap of stuff?



I think you're projecting, CCS.

 

[Spanishlad]

I thought this forum was supposed to be only about hair loss!!!

 

[Slartibartfast]

Only the hair loss sections.

 

[Nene]

People just want to be able to say "I have healthcare and you don't. Nananana-nana. Shouldn't have lost your job you lazy p.o.s, hahaha, too bad, now you die of cancer!" Timbo, why don't you complain about 3 billion dollars a year to Israel if you're so mad about your taxes? Why don't you complain about our defense budget being more than like the next 10 superpowers COMBINED, or our tax dollars lining the pockets of Halliburton? You don't mind this, but if your tax dollars contribute to helping an American in need, thats when you get upset!? You know, some people in this world are indeed, "lazy" but often people just get a bad break and need some help, I'd like it if others in my country were willing to help me out in hard times, and I'm willing to do it for them.

And CCS, that was just ridiculous to say, this is why you have a reputation as a nut job on this forum. Just because you have healthcare paid for, and housing, (Neither of which is paid for in our country) I can think of many reasons to work. How about making some money to go see a movie, to buy your toilet paper and toothpaste, to eat out once i a while, to not feel like a total useless piece of sh*t. I think the people who would simply try to live off the government are few and far b/w.

 

[DrakeWeAreLEAVING!]

unk:

 

[HughJass]

I think the people who would simply try to live off the government are few and far b/w.

not to mention the fact that it's basically impossible to do


I don't know why people, particularly those who aren't in favour of the welfare state, believe you can just go to your local unemployment office, sign up and then live for free off the government until the end of your days. I can only assume it's because they've never actually been through the process of applying for benefits before.

 

[47thin]

Just because you suck up to the wealthy, and read Ayn Rand, doesn't mean you will be rewarded. Not even close. Remember, while the republican leadership warns you about elitist democrats, they send their own kids to elite prep schools and colleges that sell grades. A recent article exposed the fact that a 3.0 at a public school equals a 3.3 at a private school. The GOP wants to privatize education so only the wealthy can get it. Meanwhile they tell dopes like you that "liberal elites" are subverting your freedom. What freedom? The freedom to yell "queer, nig*er, or commie"? The freedom to practice blatant racism? To withhold loans based on color?

When the GOP talks about freedom, it really means being able to scam people in an unregulated financial system where the buyer has to look over his shoulder and the system is socialism for the rich and capitalism for the working/ middle class.

 

[The Gardener]

...Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the working/ middle class.

YEP.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

 

[Bryan]

Really? Then explain to us all exactly how Michael Moore is supposedly "misinformed". BE SPECIFIC.

I don't really remember anything specific from the film. But I remember that everything was dramatized to the degree where the absolute worst cases in the American health system were depicted.

Oh, so all those examples he presented of people getting shafted by their insurance companies (many of them getting to the point where they actually DIED from their untreated medical problems) were just a very TINY TINY MINORITY of cases, right? :laugh:

ROTFLMAO!! Timbo, did you REALLY see Sicko, or did you just make that up about seeing it? Be honest, now!

Of course I saw it. Why would I lie about that?

Maybe because MIchael Moore made such a POWERFUL case for universal healthcare, and you're still in denial about it?

Where does it come from in Canada, the UK, France, and all those other countries? Where does it come from in CUBA, for God's sake?

I don't know where it comes from!

The question I asked was a rhetorical one, of course. It comes from taxes, the same place the money for everything else like that comes from: public roads and transportation, national defense, local police forces, etc. So many other countries in the world have figured out how to make that work for healthcare, just like it does for those other things. If we put our minds to it, _we_ can do the same, and it's high-time we do it, too. It's an idea whose time has come!

Cuba? You make me laugh! I can't believe you take that seriously! Do you really think that we are worse off than Cuba? Michael Moore got to see a beautiful hospital in the heart of Havana... As if Castro is going to let a bunch of American cameramen into his country and film what their actual hospitals are like. Think about it, it's laughable!

Cuba isn't even on the same level playing field that we are: they're having to suffer economically from the crippling trade embargo that we impose on them. It's astonishing that they're able to do as well as they are, with their healthcare! It should be a clear sign to us that WE could certainly do at least as well, if only we put our minds to it, realizing that the time has finally come!

 

[timbo]

Oh, so all those examples he presented of people getting shafted by their insurance companies (many of them getting to the point where they actually DIED from their untreated medical problems) were just a very TINY TINY MINORITY of cases, right? :laugh:

All I know is that I've never heard about such extreme cases in my life. Especially where someone died because refusal of treatment!

Maybe because MIchael Moore made such a POWERFUL case for universal healthcare, and you're still in denial about it?

Michael Moore's movie fit the exact model for what a propaganda film would look like. He relied mostly on anecdote's to stir people's emotions while provided very little fact. He is very good at what he does.

The question I asked was a rhetorical one, of course. It comes from taxes, the same place the money for everything else like that comes from: public roads and transportation, national defense, local police forces, etc. So many other countries in the world have figured out how to make that work for healthcare, just like it does for those other things. If we put our minds to it, _we_ can do the same, and it's high-time we do it, too. It's an idea whose time has come!

I guess our disagreement comes from our fundamental views of what we want and expect from our government. I personally believe that most things can be accomplished much more efficiently in the private sector, which is precisely why our country has been able to get ahead of the rest of the world in the last century. The United States is broken right now, and our debt is completely beyond repair because politicians in Washington don't know how to spend money, or better yet, they don't know how to stop spending money. We don't need another government program just to go bankrupt from corrupt politicians.

 

[47thin]

Having worked in the private sector for 30 years, I can tell you that the big difference is that the executives in the private sector are whiter, and dress better. Beyond that, and some corporate babble, they are no different than government employees. Especially in management.

 

[Nene]

I don't know why people would trust private business over the government. Sure the government isn't perfect. But I've had businesses try to rip me off throughout my entire life. They'll exploit people and the environment shamelessly. In fact I purchased a used car a couple years ago and I caught an error where they tried to overcharge me $2000. I had to go argue with them but I got the money back. Last night eyewitness news had a story on that dealership and how they didn't tell their customers that some of there cars were formal rentals. Also, I had a gym membership at Bally's total fitness. They made it all but impossible for me to cancel my membership and I had no contract. They didn't let me do it in person at the gym, calling on the phone was impossible because wait times were over 20min and it wouldn't let you wait that long. Finally I had to write a letter, even though this is the age of internet, phones, fax machines etc. They stopped charging me for a month after they got my letter, but suddenly starting sneaking charges in again after that. The got 100s of dollars from me. But these small example in my personal life. Just look at the way walmart, nike etc exploit people in sweatshops. Look at the way they pollute our environment. In the congress right now there is an auditing of Goldman-Sachs for some crooked business practices. Big Pharma is in trouble all the time for covering up drugs that kill people or marketing products for uses not approved by the fda. The list goes on and on. If you're really interested in learning more I suggest you read the Shock Doctrine, and/or A People's HIstory of the United States. Or you can watch The Corporation, Walmart: The price of low cost, or Food inc. This will give you an idea of what business is capable of. You want those people in charge of your healthcare? Why don't we also put them in charge of our police, fireman, public schools etc?

 

[timbo]

The problem with government programs is that they can't fire incompetent employees. This is why I don't even want government running education.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-be ... 04024.html

 

[The Gardener]

I understand what you are saying, Nene. And I don't disagree with most of your points.

Let me start off with a slight tweak to your premise, and then I'll explain my counterpoint to your post.

First off, your premise:

I don't know why people would trust private business over the government.

Should be tweaked to:

I don't know why people would trust private business over THIS government.

I totally understand and agree with your points about Shock Doctrine, People's History, The Price of Low Cost, and Food Inc. I totally agree. Where you and I disagree is that you see the government being a counter to these abuses. I don't. I see the government as being CONTROLLED by these entities. These entities have taken complete control of the government, and they use the government to help strenghten their monopolistic power and make the abuses WORSE.

Look at the health bill, the government is protecting Big Pharma. The FDA is complicit in many drug coverups. The government's implicit allowance for companies to offshore profits, and avoid domestic income tax on them, in effect gives companies a tax break to ship jobs overseas. And as for pollution, hate to say this, but cap and trade is a vehicle that will allow companies to pollute, and passes the cost of this pollution onto taxpayers. You also mention Goldman... the government has bent over backwards to allow the financial firms to engage in crooked economics! It's the government that allowed these firms to engage in "mark to model" fictional accounting. It was the government that repealed the Glass Steagall amendment. And, it was the government that took trillions of current and future taxpayer monies and gave them, without condition, to the banking cartel.

You are right to complain about a company ripping you off for $2000, but where is your anger at the government ripping off to the tune of trillions? What about social security... I'm guessing that through your employment you have paid into Social Security, no? Where is that money? It's gone! You've been ripped off again.

And that is the thesis of my position. If you look through human history, governments change and evolve with the society, and these changes are cycical in nature. Governments start being small, then get larger, then get monopolistic in their own right, and then they get top heavy and there is a crisis. At some point, the cycle reverts back to more honest governance, where citizens get angry enough that the government stops being a parasitic vehicle to loot the wage and salary earners of the country, and is forced back into its role of being an honest regulator. We're not there yet.

 

[joseph49853]

Republicans and democrats over the last three decades never discriminated when raiding/robbing social programs like Medicare and SS... it paid for bailouts like the S&L under Bush Sr., military under Reagan, wars and programs under both Bushes and Obama, balancing the budget under Clinton etc.

Firstly, states vs federal rights is a tale as old as Madison and Jefferson. Nation building began under Teddy Roosevelt. FCC deregulation of media started under Reagan. NAFTA/GATT and the repeal of Glass Steagall under Clinton.

Glass Steagall's repeal (and the bailouts of S&L's) created today's too big to fail monopoly pacman banks. You know, the ones that socialize losses and privatize gains? NAFTA devalued the price of American labor cementing our consumption society. That's probably where the tea party movement truly started, under Ross Perot.

Independent means freedom and mobility of thought without any party affiliation. Think George Washington. No major political party currently represents that.

You sound like a crazy person with that rant.

They say that truth is stranger than fiction. The anecdote is to: abstain from ad hominems, become a fan of Bill Moyers (who incidently just announced his retirement) and learn the difference between dialog and diatribe. Or you are just as free to enjoy your Patriot Act, wars, czars and nation building under the current Administration... and a whole host of new goodies eventually to be abused by the next pendulum President -- likely a Republican.

 

[Nene]

Republicans and democrats over the last three decades never discriminated when raiding/robbing social programs like Medicare and SS... it paid for bailouts like the S&L under Bush Sr., military under Reagan, wars and programs under both Bushes and Obama, balancing the budget under Clinton etc.

Firstly, states vs federal rights is a tale as old as Madison and Jefferson. Nation building began under Teddy Roosevelt. FCC deregulation of media started under Reagan. NAFTA/GATT and the repeal of Glass Steagall under Clinton.

Glass Steagall's repeal (and the bailouts of S&L's) created today's too big to fail monopoly pacman banks. You know, the ones that socialize losses and privatize gains? NAFTA devalued the price of American labor cementing our consumption society. That's probably where the tea party movement truly started, under Ross Perot.

Independent means freedom and mobility of thought without any party affiliation. Think George Washington. No major political party currently represents that.

You sound like a crazy person with that rant.

They say that truth is stranger than fiction. The anecdote is to: abstain from ad hominems, become a fan of Bill Moyers (who incidently just announced his retirement) and learn the difference between dialog and diatribe. Or you are just as free to enjoy your Patriot Act, wars, czars and nation building under the current Administration... and a whole host of new goodies eventually to be abused by the next pendulum President -- likely a Republican.

If you read my earlier post, I wrote one where I said I see these kinds of posts on youtube, which claim to be independent but then bad mouth Obama and usually say something positive about Ron Paul. You did all that minus the Ron Paul praise. First of all I'm not a republican or Democrat myself, I'm way too liberal to identify with these punk democrats. I would've voted for Nader in 2008 but got caught in Obama fever, but I will be voting for him in 2012. Anyway, you talk about the current administration and the Patriot Act (started under Bush), wars (started under Bush), czars ( I suggest you look up how many Bush had vs how many Obama has), and I'm not exactly sure what you mean by Nation building. In any event, you are attributing all these negative things to Obama that Bush actually started so to me it seems you have an agenda. Now don't get me wrong, I am disappointed in Obama because he was supposed to bring change, and his change has been unsatisfactory as far as I'm concerned. I will give him credit for improving relations with Cuba, ending the stem cell ban, passing a healthcare law (albeit a lame one), and now working on financial regulation. He hasn't closed gitmo, he expanded the afghan war, and hasn't ended the patriot act, all of which is unacceptable. Anyway, you seem to be the one going on diatribes here.