Thread: Obamas first bad decision.

Originally Posted by Whiggamore

All this personal attacking and elections and stuff makes me sad. Can we please close this thread?

Where exactly is the personal attack?

If you don't like these threads how about just stay out of it, no one is forcing you to read them if they bother you so much.

I think we are all f'ed in the A. I hear Jack Bauer is in Africa right now too, so he won't be able to save us either...

Originally Posted by Wildtim

Once again I hope his policies fail, dramatically.

His failure to try and stimulate the economy by throwing money at it might mean a few companies would go under but the rest would reorganize and create better practices preventing a reoccurrence of the current situation in the future.

His failure to bring our troops home on his schedule might mean that they are being too successful to make his ideas look good at that time.

His health plan failing to get past the lawmakers will mean that I get to keep controlling my medical choices, not to mention keeping a bigger chunk of my paycheck.

All those consequences are ones I would welcome.


To point at the past for an example: I was glad when Bushes Amnesty failed, dramatically, that was the best thing that could have happened to that ill conceived policy, the consequences to him were the loss of political clout and much public favor, but the consequences to me and the future of our country were all good.

But just suppose, only for a moment that your wishes do not come true and Barak Obama actually leads this nation in a successful manner. Suppose his policies work and the economy improves. Suppose we do affect a successful withdraw from Iraq and finish the goal of neutralizing Osama Bin Laden. Suppose we end up with a working healthcare program. Would these successes be disappointing to you? Do you really hope that we as nation fails simply so you can say "I told you so"?

I must withdraw from these political discussions. I find them a source of great disappoinment. Being unemployed and infirmed I have enough disappointment already. I must stick to things that help to give me hope or I will step in front of a train.

Originally Posted by Whiggamore

Tim, giving up your freedom in medicine will go down in history as one of the saddest things the American people ever did. You really wonder if all the tears, the blood, the sweat, all that sacrifice of so many of your forefathers was in vain. Seriously.

Why? Wat on earth does a working national healthcare system have to do with the founding fathers?
You have public roads, public parks, public libraries, ...
And it's not like the current system works well enough that you could argue that change isn't necessary.

What is it obama can do for the economy? The system is set up to take care of itself. Everything that could be done to slow the market's fall has been done. Now if the media would stop making a big deal out of it...

Do you think socializing the healthcare system is going to make anything better? The standard of care will drop through the floor. You get what you pay for initially and it goes down from there.

Do you really think obama will have much of a say as to when troops will withdrawl from Iraq? It's the joint chiefs that are running that show.

Originally Posted by twelvepbrs

I think we are all f'ed in the A. I hear Jack Bauer is in Africa right now too, so he won't be able to save us either...

Who is Jack Bauer?

The quality of health care in this country is spotty at best. For many, it's unavailable unless they show up unannounced at an emergency room and wait for hours. For most of the rest of us, it's rationed. Don't believe it? Try getting an appointment with a specialist inside six months. It's further rationed by the prices we have to pay for prescription drugs-- prices that the rest of the world seems to be spared.

In my career, I've traveled very widely, including to countries with "socialized" medicine. The disaster claimed by the right wing simply does not exist. True, there are occasional adjustments, but for the most part, I'm simply not hearing complaints. Perhaps our Canadian brothers might comment on whether they'd trade their system for ours. Any Norwegians? When push gets to shove, would our British -- or Scottish or Welsh -- members really prefer to go on the "American System?"

The only difference I can see between right wingers facing an Obama administration now and us moderates faced with Bush eight years ago is that, while both of us expect imminent disaster, we moderates actually got a disaster, and you right wingers don't know yet. Bush has been even worse than we'd feared in our most terrifying nightmares. It's an achievement that Obama would be hard pressed to equal. That alone gives me hope.

Welcome to the club.

j

Originally Posted by icedog

Suppose we do affect a successful withdraw from Iraq and finish the goal of neutralizing Osama Bin Laden.

PLEASE tell me you dont think that the US went to Iraq to neutrazlize the threat posed by Bin Laden! No wonder you havent found him yet!

Originally Posted by icedog

Who is Jack Bauer?

Jack Bauer is the most likely choice for Barrack Obama's National Security Advisor

Originally Posted by sidneykidney

PLEASE tell me you dont think that the US went to Iraq to neutrazlize the threat posed by Bin Laden! No wonder you havent found him yet!

C'mon Sid, the order in which I listed the two separate military goals doesn't appear ambiguous to me. However, in the event you don't understand:

1. Withdraw our troops from Iraq.
2. Pursue the goal of neutralizing Osama Bin Laden (and Al Qeada)

Jack Bauer is the most likely choice for Barrack Obama's National Security Advisor

Jack Bauer is a character on a TV show? Wow, thanks twelvepbrs, the needle on your cred meter just hit zero.

I'd like to do an uncharacteristic thing, i.e., reply on-topic.

The original topic of this thread was the wisdom (or lack of it) of the appointment of Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm to Obama's council of economic advisors.

I really can't say how good a governor she's been. I do know that Michigan is one of our more economically-challenged states due to the implosion of the auto industry. While I've always blamed mismanagement by the companies themselves for that, the thread creator seems to place that firmly in Ms. Granholm's lap.

Probably unfair. The auto companies have been screwing up for a very long time. She's been in office for 22 months.

Beyond that, isn't it rather a smart idea to have the governor of such a challenged state represented? Even if she's the screwup you say, wouldn't it be useful to Obama and beneficial to Michigan to be represented by the governor with the full might of her state resources? Might that not bode well for Michigan's future?

Look at it another way: How would you feel if Michigan had been ignored in the composition of the panel?

j