Political discussion thread

Henry Plainview wrote: Oh yeah, Gitmo is hilarious. It's easy to yell at Bush, but it's much harder to come up with an actual plan. Whoops! I can't decide whether Obama maintaining many of Bush's policies is an indictment of Obama or a vindication of Bush.

Both.

JJLehto wrote: Heard this on the news today, er yesterday, and it really upset me, (now you all know I love Obama but this really made me mad). Apparently, as part of his health care plan he wants to include things like putting a tax on sugary drinks. Now I HATE this type of stuff. Like with NYC wanting to ban trans-fats, or in this case taxing sugary drinks. Now I am a pretty hard line liberal, but you can't tell people what or what not to eat! That's just f*cking wrong. As for gitmo, I was all for the closing but I 100% knew that...well you have to put them somewhere. Maybe build a few more of those super max prisons? I approve of the closing, but Obama should've waited, you know come up with a plan before hand...

I agree entirely. It's sickening.

I am ok with banning trans fats because they're just a way for corporations to save some money, at the cost of the health of the consumer. Read about it some, because they're artificial they never really break down like normal fats. They're pretty much the worst thing you can eat. Taxing sugary drinks is inconsistent because if obesity is not a choice, then why would introducing rational incentives change anything?

Fair?  Not sure what that word means when it comes to government services-- but the fact remains that I have sugary drinks, exercise (been a karate teacher for almost 20 years), and yet am willing to help figure out a way to make this happen.  Go figure.   And I have no illusions about the efficiency of a government contracted health system, but the point is people are being bankrupt - literally destroyed - because a drunk ran into them or they get leukemia.  It has to stop.

I'm paraphrasing here, but I think Ben Franklin said something to the effect of "Those who wish to give up freedom for security deserve neither." This applies to economic freedom and security, just as it applies to law and order (warrantless wiretapping, etc). I'm not entirely against having the gov't do something to help less fortunate get health care, but scapegoating groups of consumers so you can tax them to pay for it is wrong. People are looking at the whole health care thing the wrong way. Instead, we should be looking at what is driving health care costs so unbelievably high. Of course that'll never happen because nobody in gov't ever actually wants to solve something b/c that takes time and effort. Rather they just wanna slap a quick band-aid type fix on the issue.


Edited by Deathrabbit - June 11 2009 at 01:28

Guys, taxing does not mean banning... Tobacco and alcohol are heavily taxed in many European countries, but that does not mean that people can't smoke or drink. Personally, I don't like sugary drinks (I drink mainly water), and don't believe they are particularly good for you, but equating a tax with a ban is ridiculous.

I am afraid you Americans are obsessed with the idea of the 'bad government' wanting to control your lives that you don't realise that, even if you did away with government, there would always be someone trying to stop you from doing this or that. You should look at the list of the things that we can or cannot do in the complex where I live (and I am the owner of my condo, not renting)... While I agree with some of them, others are a bit on the ridiculous side, even if we pay good money to them every month.

You know, all this whole posing as victims of the bad government and/or politicians (something that is rife in Italy) is, in my opinion, just a way for people to avoid taking responsibility for their choices. If nothing happens, it's always someone else's fault, and there's nothing we can do to change it. That's very odd, and makes me wonder why we are not still living in caves, if nothing can be changed... It's just that taking matters in your own hands takes guts, while complaining is cheap. 

All of the above is a moot point when you consider the fact now is possibly the most horrible time to contemplate National Healthcare. We've already spent a ridiculous amount of money; Obama and Bush have made the national debt astronomical. We need to fix that first, otherwaise there may not be a nation to nationalize healthcare for. At this rate, it'll be a cold day when China stops writing us checks.

^well, better hope that the incendiary work that Hannitty, O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Palin are doing doesn't succeed... they're really pushing, it seems, for the right-wing to become fanatical and take matters into their own hands....

JJLehto wrote: The T wrote: ^well, better hope that the incendiary work that Hannitty, O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Palin are doing doesn't succeed... they're really pushing, it seems, for the right-wing to become fanatical and take matters into their own hands.... Well now let's be realistic and not demonize them, (more than we need to). These extremists are truly on the fringe... I mean past even Limbaugh. I also saw a youtube video of a recorded interview with this one preacher who actually said he was praying for Obama's death. THOSE are some extreme views. I really dont think Rush and Sean and Palin will be heading the right wing terrorism....but I can see the problem: If you're that extreme you're already unstable, the election of a black man, esp one who so many think is a socialist could push those few over the edge. And tough economic conditions are how more people turn to extremism... Again, I hope I'm wrong...

Unfortunately, this is why Hitler was elected in 1933.... History should have taught us a lesson. Personally, I believe hate speech should be curbed, though this goes against the First Amendment. You never know how many people are ready to listen... Look at what happened in Europe last weekend. Far too many voted for the far right, and this is something that worries me a lot.