Politics Thread

[HGervais]

I was managing at Emeril's the night Senator Kennedy came in to propose to his wife and when I say the entire place went silent when he walked in and stayed silent until he sat down, I mean the place was silent. The only other person I have ever met who commanded that kind of attention was Bill Clinton. People can say what they want about the man but it is hard to deny he fought constantly & consistently for what he believed and that the lives of countless people have been made better by his energy & his passion.

[corkbouy]

The funeral cathedral is literally around the corner from where I live. The place is a-buzz with camera crews. Its going to be interesting watching such an event first-hand...

[tucco]

Found this interesting: For whatever it is worth

" The
> Last of The Kennedy Dynasty
>
> As
> soon as his cancer was detected, there was an immediate
> attempt at the "canonization" of old Teddy by the
> mainstream media. They are saying what a "great
> American" he is. I say, let's get a couple things
> clear and not twist the facts to change the real
> history;
>
> 1. He was caught cheating at Harvard when he attended it.
> He was expelled twice, once for cheating on a test, and once
> for paying a classmate to cheat for him.
>
>
> 2.
> While expelled, Kennedy enlisted in the Army, but mistakenly
> signed up for four years instead of two. Oops! The man
> can't count to four! His father, Joseph P. Kennedy,
> former U.S. Ambassador to England (a step up from
> bootlegging liquor into the US from Canada during
> prohibition), pulled the necessary strings to have his
> enlistment shortened to two years, and to ensure that he
> served in Europe, not Korea, where a war was raging. No
> preferential treatment for him (like he charged that
> President Bush received)!
>
>
> 3.
> Kennedy was assigned to Paris, never advanced beyond the
> rank of Private, and returned to Harvard upon being
> discharged. Imagine a person of his "education"
> never advancing past the rank of Private!
>
> 4.
> While attending law school at the University of Virginia, he
> was cited for reckless driving four times, including
> once when he was clocked driving 90 miles per hour in a
> residential neighborhood (with his headlights off after
> dark). Yet his Virginia driver's license was never
> revoked. Coincidentally, he passed the bar exam in 1959.
> Amazing!
>
> 5.
> In 1964, he was seriously injured in a plane crash, and
> hospitalized for several months. Test results done by the
> hospital at the time he was admitted had shown he was
> legally intoxicated. The results of those tests remained a
> "state secret" until in the 1980's when the
> report was unsealed. Didn't hear about that from the
> "un" biased media, did we?
>
> 6.
> On July 19, 1969, Kennedy attended a party on Chappaquiddick
> Island in Massachusetts. At about 11:00 PM, he borrowed his
> chauffeur's keys to his Oldsmobile limousine, and
> offered to give a ride home to Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign
> worker. Leaving the island via an unlit bridge with no guard
> rail, Kennedy steered the car off the bridge, flipped, and
> into Poucha Pond.
>
> 7.
> He swam to shore and walked back to the party, passing
> several houses and a fire station. Two friends then returned
> with him to the scene of the accident. According to their
> later testimony, they told him what he already knew - that
> he was required by law to immediately report the accident to
> the authorities. Instead Kennedy made his way to his hotel,
> called his lawyer, and went to sleep. Kennedy called the
> police the next morning and by then the wreck had already
> been discovered. Before dying, Kopechne had scratched at the
> upholstered floor above her head in the upside-down car. The
> Kennedy family began "calling in favors", ensuring
> that any inquiry would be contained. Her corpse was whisked
> out-of-state to her family, before an autopsy could be
> conducted. Further details are uncertain, but after the
> accident Kennedy says he repeatedly dove under the water
> trying to rescue Kopechne and he didn't call police
> because he was in a state of shock. It is widely assumed
> Kennedy was drunk, and he held off calling police in hopes
> that his family could fix the problem overnight. Since the
> accident, Kennedy's "political enemies" have
> referred to him as the distinguished Senator from
> Chappaquiddick. He pled guilty to leaving the scene of an
> accident, and was given a SUSPENDED SENTENCE OF TWO
> MONTHS.... Kopechne's family received a small payout
> from the Kennedy's insurance policy, and never sued.
> There was later an effort to have her body exhumed and
> autopsied, but her family successfully fought against this
> in court, and Kennedy's family paid their attorney's
> bills... a "token of
> friendship"?
>
> 8.
> Kennedy has held his Senate seat for more than forty years,
> but considering his longevity, his accomplishments seem
> scant. He authored or argued for legislation that ensured a
> variety of civil rights, increased the minimum wage in 1981,
> made access to health care easier for the indigent, and
> funded Meals on Wheels for fixed-income seniors and is
> widely held as the "standard-bearer for
> liberalism". In his very first Senate roll, he was the
> floor manager for the bill that turned U.S. immigration
> policy upside down and opened the floodgate for immigrants
> from third world countries.
>
> 9.
> Since that time, he has been the prime instigator and author
> of every expansion of an increase in immigration, up to and
> including the latest attempt to grant amnesty to illegal
> aliens. Not to mention the pious grilling he gave the last
> two Supreme Court nominees, as if he was the standard bearer
> for the nation in matters of "what's right."
> What a pompous ass!
>
> 10.
> He is known around Washington as a public drunk, loud,
> boisterous and very disrespectful to ladies. JERK is a
> better description than "great American." "A
> blonde in every pond" is his
> motto.
>
> (And
> let's not forget that just days ago he tried to get
> special permission to name his replacement rather than going
> through the procedures of an election ... that will take
> place in about 5 months. Yup, he thought he was above laws,
> rules, and regulations because he'd been taught that as
> proved above.)
>

> Let's
> not allow the spin doctors make this jerk a hero -- how
> quickly the American public forgets what his real legacy is.
> Let's keep this going for truth, justice, and the
> American way!

[Steve T Power]

That sounds like the Ted Kennedy i remember. Typical American politician.

[tucco]

If all this is absolutely verifiable, he got away with more crap than anyone I can think of. (in America anyway).

I got that rant in an email.

[Bryan Pope]

If all this is absolutely verifiable, he got away with more crap than anyone I can think of. (in America anyway).

http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/tedkennedy.asp

[HGervais]

That is the thing Bryan....you can say what you like about Ted Kennedy the person and yeah clearly in his youth he was very much a hellraiser & a spoiled brat....which I think is one of the reasons George W Bush was clearly so fond of Kennedy...I think in many ways they were kindred spirits....but to say Kennedy was a ineffective legislator is absurd and totally flies in the face of facts. Kennedy was one of those dying breed of pols...the one who knew that in order to get something, sometimes you have to give up something. Politics is the art of the compromise...or at least it used to be.

[HGervais]

I knew when everything was said & done George Bush's record on the economy was going to be bad...I had no idea it was going to be this bad. Now why are we supposed to listen to the GOP on how to deal with the economic mess again?

[mavrach]

I know I haven't been in this thread that much. But something really bugs me about the GOP: when Bush was in office, they said they hated the Democrats because they said you're supposed to support your President no matter what, just because he is your President and must be respected. That's how they defended Bush. However now they're tearing Obama apart, which just shows that they are hypocrites who will only support people on "their side." I knew they would do this when a Democrat got elected, which is why I didn't consider their words when they supported Bush.

[HGervais]

Total and complete hypocrisy. The example I like to point to is all the rallies Bush was attending during the election of 2004. Now bear in mind almost all of them were publically financed events but they were arresting people who were wearing John Kerry t-shirts or removing people from the hall who had bumper stickers they did not like on their care. Compare & contrast that to people showing up to Obama town halls armed, at a Arizona rally 12 people showed up with weapons and a few even had AK-47s, with the Obama as Hitler posters and the like and as is their right in this country, they were allowed to stay. Combine that with the GOP having the most watched media outlet stroking the fires 24/7 and you have a dangerous situation but Obama is a Kenyan who they all know is really a communist/socialist/fascist who is also trying to indoctrinate our youth, so the attacks are actually a defense of American liberty, which makes it all good.

[Dan Mancini]

The problem with charges of hypocrisy is that they always cut both ways. Isn't dissent supposed to be the highest form of patriotism? ("Dissent" being defined as "comparing the president to Hitler," of course).

[HGervais]

The problem with charges of hypocrisy is that they always cut both ways. Isn't dissent supposed to be the highest form of patriotism? ("Dissent" being defined as "comparing the president to Hitler," of course).

I completely agree about dissent but now as opposed to then how much chest pounding do you hear on Faux News about how radical opponents of the president are? How much talk do you hear about treason? I mean for god's sake you have governors talking about succession & trying to utilize the 10 amendment for the first time since certain states didn't like federal mandates on civil rights. I thought Bush was a disaster and did more to destroy the fabric of this country than almost anyone we have seen in our history but I never even considered using the language the anti-Obama crowd has. The problem Dan is that the radical right is much closer to the mainstream on that side of the aisle than the leftist fringe is to their mainstream. The left does not have anyone close in influence to a Glenn Beck or a Rush Limbaugh has with the right to say nothing of the Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys, Michael Savages, Ann Coulters, Michelle Malkins, Mark Levines etc of the right.
I support free speech to the bitter end but I also realize that because you can say or do something does not mean you should and what was not acceptable on the right in any way shape or form has suddenly become very acceptable...on steroids.
And Dan....secret prisons, illegal domestic wireless phonetapping, secret assassination squads, torture, extraordinary rendition, indefinite imprisonment without trial or charge...all the things we know to be true....a pretty serious case can be factually made comparing George Bush's administration to all kind of things.
None of which to say that Obama is perfect or that there are not areas where I personally strongly disagree with him on. None of which is to say we should not be watchful & mindful of what our government is up to but really Dan, you can't compare the opposition which Obama recieves and what was thought right & proper just a few months ago by the people currently going apeshit over almost everything he does. It's like Clinton hatred increased by a factor of 10.

[Dan Mancini]

The problem with charges of hypocrisy is that they always cut both ways. Isn't dissent supposed to be the highest form of patriotism? ("Dissent" being defined as "comparing the president to Hitler," of course).

I completely agree about dissent but now as opposed to then how much chest pounding do you hear on Faux News about how radical opponents of the president are?

Now, instead of being traitors, opponents of the president are just racist.

[Future Man]

I've heard there are some people so blinded by hatred for the previous administration (fueled by their view of the 2000 election) that they abandoned rational thought on the subject to the point that they have given credence to the idea that 9/11 was an inside job.

[HGervais]

I've heard there are some people so blinded by hatred for the previous administration (fueled by their view of the 2000 election) that they abandoned rational thought on the subject to the point that they have given credence to the idea that 9/11 was an inside job.

There are but who can you point to in the mainstream media or high profile bloggers to find one of those people? Olbermann perhaps but I have never heard him float the idea of 9/11 being a conspiracy. Maybe Michael Moore but when was the last time you saw him with anyone in a position of power? You can try and make all the false equivalencies you want but at the end of the day all you have to do is spend time looking at cable news, listening to talk radio or reading blogs from both sides and you see pretty quickly the right fringe is much more in the mainstream than the left wing fringe is. And that is fine. People are entitled to their own opinions, if not their own facts, but specifically I'm speaking of the sheer & complete hypocrisy of conservative media. You can't help but see it if you possess an open pair of eyes.

[Future Man]

Well for the sake of argument if they are in the mainstream then by definition they aren't fringe, or am I confused, or are you confusing fringe with those who disagree with you?

And yes I think "birthers" have had enough evidence before them for quite some time to be considered fringe, just as I believe that so-called 9-11 truthers are also fringe albeit of the totally unhinged, tin-foil-hat wearing loony variety.

[HGervais]

From the Glen Beck/Dick Armey organized march on DC today:
One
Two
Three
Now if people like Beck were calling these people out, that would be one thing but Beck, O'Reilly, Palin, Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity, Levine, Inofe, Boehner, Cantor, Grassley and the rest are egging these people on.
If it were dissent or opposing opinions that would be fine but the birthers, the racism charges against Obama by Beck, the death panels bs, the indoctrination of our school kids bs...all the rest it is fueled by mainstream right wing media. That is fringe Mike and that is the face of today's GOP.

[Future Man]

If it were dissent or opposing opinions that would be fine but the birthers,...

Birthers already discussed.

the racism charges against Obama by Beck,...

Not sure what Beck's specific charges are in this regard but would you hang out in a racist church for 20 years? Or appoint someone like Van Jones to anything? Or refer to your grandmother as a "typical white person"? None of this is worth exploring?

the death panels bs...

It's the slippery slope that many are afraid of. Rationing healthcare creates de facto death panels. I for one am waiting for Obama to say "I never want this country's healthcare system to mirror Great Britain's, or Oregon's for that matter." Yet I know that he would never say that; I know Obama is trying to have us take baby steps toward total socialized medicine. Do you want the government to run our hospitals? Have you heard the horror stories of VA hospitals? Would that sound good across the board to you? There are less dangerous avenues to go down in attempting to remedy the clear problems our healthcare system has. Pave the way for increased competition among private insurers and you'll see premiums plummet.

the indoctrination of our school kids bs...

Well they did remove the bit about "How can I help the President" from the classroom guides, didn't they? And besides, are you suggesting that you would have not had a problem with Bush preempting nationwide classroom time to give students a speech, benign or not? I would have had a problem with that. You wouldn't have suggested that Bush fancied himself "the great leader"? You wouldn't have decried it as, at best, a stunt designed in no small part to reach soon-to-be-voting high schoolers?

[Andrew Forbes]

It's the slippery slope that many are afraid of. Rationing healthcare creates de facto death panels. I for one am waiting for Obama to say "I never want this country's healthcare system to mirror Great Britain's, or Oregon's for that matter." Yet I know that he would never say that; I know Obama is trying to have us take baby steps toward total socialized medicine. Do you want the government to run our hospitals? Have you heard the horror stories of VA hospitals? Would that sound good across the board to you? There are less dangerous avenues to go down in attempting to remedy the clear problems our healthcare system has. Pave the way for increased competition among private insurers and you'll see premiums plummet.

Insurance companies seem to be operating as death panels as it stands. And if I understood anything of Obama's (inter)national address the other day, it's that he wants to implement steps to create direct competition between insurance companies through an insurance marketplace. It's the basis of everything he presented in his speech. He also seemed to place emphasis on removing insurance companies ability to spontaneously deny previously assured coverage. What plans specifically suggest that government will step in and begin running hospitals?

Here I used to have this paragraph wondering why Americans flip out at the merest hint of socialized anything, and always equate socialism to Stalinist tyrant worship and so forth, but then I remembered that free-market capitalism invariably works flawlessly, and decided to leave it alone.

In closing, let us all bless our Great Leader, the national father, Stephen Harper, and may his continuing good health and solid gold throne grant him the strength and wisdom to take our undeserving country bravely into the coming age of global unity.

[HGervais]

the indoctrination of our school kids bs...

Well they did remove the bit about "How can I help the President" from the classroom guides, didn't they? And besides, are you suggesting that you would have not had a problem with Bush preempting nationwide classroom time to give students a speech, benign or not? I would have had a problem with that. You wouldn't have suggested that Bush fancied himself "the great leader"? You wouldn't have decried it as, at best, a stunt designed in no small part to reach soon-to-be-voting high schoolers?

No I would not have had a problem with George Bush addressing our school kids. Reagan addressed school kids nationally via C-SPAN, Bush 41 did the same thing. They are the leaders of our country. They are role models. It is not something I have a problem with at all. I'm not nearly that cynical. Kids need encouragement and the President talking about staying in school, working hard and doing everything you can to control your own destiny through education strikes me as a message worth delivering that everyone should be able to get behind. Yeah I had a lot of problems with Bush but not with the office he held or the respect he deserved because of that office. That whole indoctrination bs whine really was a hissy fit too far.

the death panels bs...

It's the slippery slope that many are afraid of. Rationing healthcare creates de facto death panels. I for one am waiting for Obama to say "I never want this country's healthcare system to mirror Great Britain's, or Oregon's for that matter." Yet I know that he would never say that; I know Obama is trying to have us take baby steps toward total socialized medicine. Do you want the government to run our hospitals? Have you heard the horror stories of VA hospitals? Would that sound good across the board to you? There are less dangerous avenues to go down in attempting to remedy the clear problems our healthcare system has. Pave the way for increased competition among private insurers and you'll see premiums plummet.

No it is not a slippery slope. The Death Panel story was/is bs. Every single GOP operative who repeats it is a liar and anyone who believes it is not doing research on their own. The origins of the death panels come from an amendment proposed by Johnny Isakson a very conservative Republican from Georgia, this same program is something Newt Gingrich was in favor of a little over a year ago and something Palin pushed for as governor of Alaska. It's about discussing options with our elderly so they can make better & more informed decisions about the final chapter of their lives. It's about making the quality of their lives better, not about pulling the plug on them. Even the Republican who gave the rebuttal to Obama's speech on Wed. night has said the "death panel" stuff is crap. I am so sick & tired of hearing this bullshit repeated over & over again.
And Mike, you instantly lose serious points when you open with the rationing line. We already ration health care in a serious way with the system we currently have. How do you think insurance companies run a 20% profit on health care? I wish we were talking about socializing medicine ala the UK or Canadian system but we are not. What is being proposed is pretty much what Mitt Romney passed as governor of Massachusetts and a whole lot like what Richard Nixon proposed way back in the early 1970s. The public option is in fact very conservative in nature and if GOP operatives had a shread of honestly they would admit that. And you might want to do a little research about the quality of care in the VA system.
Private insurance companies are not going to do this on their own. It's why premiums have gone up 90% in the past nine years, why premiums increase 7 times faster than the rate of inflation and why insurance companies profits have gone up 428% in the past nine years. You need a public option to promote competition. You need the public option to keep insurance companies honest. You need the public option to drive costs down. And you might also want to check your facts about the UK system, which this plan is NOT, because you will find very high satisfaction rates with the quality of their health care. Stop parroting the same tired old talking points on this. You don't do yourself or anyone you are talking with any favors.

[TemporalWisdom]

Have you heard the horror stories of VA hospitals?

Um, that was one hospital. The VA system is actually highly cost-effective, much more so than the broken system everyone else in this country puts up with. Some would say it's even better than what Canada, France, or Germany has. And the Walter Reed debacle notwithstanding, our veterans on the whole are reported to be quite satisfied with the VA system and in excellent health.

[Future Man]

How many millions of uninsured are there today who somehow manage to have SUVs and high speed internet and cable TV and cell phones but who nonetheless "can't afford" any form of health insurance? From their irresponsible ranks, how many millions won't even shell out the premium necessary for a public option? Do they get to start paying the public option premium after they come down with a serious illness and receive coverage anyway? Isn't that like expecting to buy coverage for hurricane damage after your house has blown down? This is so "unthought out" it's mindnumbing.

[Ptolemy]

I really dislike the 'people who don't deserve it are going to get healthcare ... After all, I pay for my coverage, why shouldn't they?' argument

Let's exagerate wildly and say 50 percent of the people with no insurance currently don't deserve healthcare. That means only 23 million people deserve our help. Is the number really 75 percent? 90 percent? At what point do we tell the people who need it that they can't have it because of what someone else might be doing to milk the system? I heard some talking head saying that this new healthcare plan was going to cost the average American something a little under $200 per year. Other experts disagree of course and Obama's goal is to accomplish this in a way that completely pays for itself - but let's say it is $200.00 per year. - is that really too much to ask that we pay a bit extra to take care of the less fortunate? Isn't that part of what being a member of society is? And what do we get for our $200.00? I might not be able to afford as many nice things as I do now - but what is our community going to look like if we have 60 percent fewer bankruptcies out there? What if people live better, more productive lives because they're healthier? Is it inconceivable that there could be a greater than $200.00 benefit for each or us?

And that is the worst case scenario - what if the plan works? what if prices really do come down? What if the plan can pay for itself and social security doesn't go bankrupt?

[Future Man]

The less fortunate is one thing (and there's Medicaid already) but you are sidestepping the quandary of the irresponsible--those who could afford a hypothetical public option but either wouldn't bother to pay for it ("Why should I pay for it when I'm not sick?") or wouldn't make the "hard" choices (i.e., no cable TV) necessary to pay for it. I say let's take care of the widows and the orphans and the lame so to speak, but other than that, should we all shoulder the burden of the just plain irresponsible too? For as they say, the problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of the other guy's money.

[HGervais]

Mike again, nothing in front of Congress is anything close to socialized medicine. We are not talking about a UK or Canadian system. We are talking about a free market based health care system which will hopefully promote choice and lower costs for everyone. There is also talk of mandates being included in the legislation. The proposed system looks to be a lot closer to what the Swiss & Germans use. It might be nice for the purposes of constructive discussion if you dealt with reality instead of straw man fantasies.

[Chris_Sax]

http://www.fz.se/wtf/item.fz?id=5736

[Future Man]

Mike again, nothing in front of Congress is anything close to socialized medicine. We are not talking about a UK or Canadian system. We are talking about a free market based health care system which will hopefully promote choice and lower costs for everyone. There is also talk of mandates being included in the legislation. The proposed system looks to be a lot closer to what the Swiss & Germans use. It might be nice for the purposes of constructive discussion if you dealt with reality instead of straw man fantasies.

Obama has not been consistent in indicating his true aims in this area; in 2003 he went on the record asserting that he is "a proponent of a single payer univeral health care program." It took me all of ten seconds for a google search to come up with this side by side video comparison of Obama then and now: http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/08/obama-single-payer-plan.html

So you can call it straw man fantasies, but I would like to see it all out on the table rather than the usual "how to boil a frog" methodology that we are accustomed to from the left. What's the endgame, is what I want to know. This is the eternal battle that conservatives face. Why can't Obama say "I would never want it to go this far"? Would that be too much to ask? Since it would be too much to ask of him, how do you feel about socialized medicine a la the UK? You'd never want to see it here, right?

[HGervais]

Yeah because people's thinking does not evolve over time or they can't look at the lay of the land and try to come up with a solution all sides can live with? It's called compromise and it is the cornerstone of politics. Mike..you can look at what is in the legislation. The public option continues to be the most conservative of approaches and negotiations would appear to keep moving away from that and watering the legislation down. That is the reality of the situation. Look I know you guys are deathly afraid of Obama for whatever reason, just like you guys are afraid of change but this has been a pretty open process in which the GOP has been invited at every step of the way to participate in but they have seen fit to stand on the sidelines stomping their feet while lying or misrepresenting the truth in an attempt to confuse & scare the very people this legislation will help the most. At every point of this discussion you have thrown GOP rhetoric out there and that rhetoric has been exposed for what it is. I know you are unwilling or unable to see truth & facts that diviate from what you are being told to think. It's why you are constantly changing the subject. That is your problem, not mine because for the 100th time I'm going to try and stop responding to you like you were a rational person willing to discus things openinly & honestly.
The only thing we have in common on this is we are both being let down by what is going on. You because you fear "socialism" or whichever ism is in vogue with right wing media outlets tomorrow and I'm let down because I want full on universal, single-payer health care. You think any change is too much and I think what is being discussed does not go nearly far enough.
And with that I am locking this thread. I am not going to watch it degrade again into a pissing match between the same 3 or 4 people, myself in that number. I am happy to talk about anything with anyone but it only goes as far as the other party being interesting in having an actual give & take discussion that is based in reality & deals with facts but I am done banging my head against a wall with something who won't even consider other points of view...especially the ones backed up with facts.
One last final link though, the excellent fact check.org looks at 7 health care reform lies. Best of luck to us all.