Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Thursday, August 20, 2009

Michael Goodwin: Where have you gone, Barack Obama? Where is the sunny-side-up young man who promised to inspire and unite an unhappy nation? Gone into the partisan sinkhole of Washington, that's where.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

jeffj

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

From the article:

Those who say it can't happen should study a recent New York Times/CBS poll. Among the lowlights:

* Sixty-nine percent believe Obamacare will hurt the quality of their own health care.

* Seventy-three percent believe they will have less access to tests and treatment.

* Sixty-two percent believe Democrats' proposals would force them to change doctors.

* Seventy-six percent believe Obama's changes will mean higher taxes for them.

* Seventy-seven percent expect their health care costs to rise.


Ouch!

People aren't buying what he's selling.

People aren't buying what he's selling.

That is what happens when you start looking around at everyone else that has taken the snake oil before you make the purchase yourself.

BTW... for anyone that wants to start quoting statistics, just look at the cancer survival rate by country. You will find that the US is ahead of both Canada and England. A good part of the reason for that is the wait periods necessary under and overloaded public health system when time is critical for treatment of those diseases.

www.medicinenet.com

After non-melanoma skin cancer, and lung cancer the most common cancers are breast and prostate cancer.

www.cancer.gov

If you will notice, the US is the top of the list for survival of those types of cancer.

Moo,

You are such an asshole.

Don't fuck up a good narrative with pesky facts and statistics.

This is the exact obama I elected.

At one time 65 percent thought blacks should be slaves.

Of course I don't know the real percent but the point is enough people thought so that it was legal for 100 years.

Some times the people don't know what is good for them and that's why we have elections so leaders choose.

We don't have votes by the people for each law. Mob mentalities would rule then and common sense wouldn't exist.

65 percent might believe health care reform will make things worse but that doesn't mean they are right or are even telling the truth.

The American people are hysterics. Calling Obama a failure at this point in his term is akin to labeling him the Anti-Christ.

The name-calling comes mostly from the same place. It began months before he was even elected. I gave W. a year before I decided who he was, I'll give Barack the same.

But I have to tell you I'm ever so much happier now that W. is gone. It's likely Obama will have to skin and eat kittens after dashing their little brains out before I pine for the "good old days".

Some times the people don't know what is good for them and that's why we have elections so leaders choose

#5 | Posted by klifferd

I am sorry to hear that you are unable to think for yourself and make decisions on what is best for you and your family. It is clear that you would rather have the govedrnment make all of your important decisions. Spoken like a true socialist, " I do not want to take responsability for my actions"

Many many years ago when I was a union member I asked my rep why the union was taking a certain position that I did not agree with and his answer was " We know what is best for you". I soon became a non-member.

"Some times the people don't know what is good for them and that's why we have elections so leaders choose." - Kliff

The mentatlity of the left on display. IMHO, this is what it really all boils down to. Conservatives believe that the people know best, while liberals look to the governement for everything.

Some times the people don't know what is good for them and that's why we have elections so leaders choose.

Ahhhh... the old "We are sheep; hear us bleat" line.

I thought we elected officials to represent our wants and values to the government. I didn't know we elected them to do our thinking for us. Who knew?

Goodwin is throwing in the towel too early. Obama wasn't just going to walk into the White House and immediately get everything he wanted from Congress. Since he admits that D.C. is a sinkhole, he should not be surprised that Obama is having trouble in it.


The headline is correct, he is not the president he had represented himself to be. He appears to be MUCH LESS qualified than we had originally thought. He is going to be a colossal FAILURE. He is going to make Bush look like a towering success by comparison.

Now my question is I remember when Bush was LEADING and the polls were against him the dems here were CROWING that the President should follow the will of the people because this was a democracy. (Wrong on way to many levels to explain...but at least be both consistent AND stupid!) When will they say the same thing to their boy?

-Conservatives believe that the people know best, while liberals look to the governement for everything.


Conservatives believe that gub'mint is ebil, while liberals look at the government as being created of, by, and for the people.

I wasn't expecting Obama to be able to do all I hoped he'd do. But I'll settle for a piece of the pie; it's still pie and it beats the bejeezus out of what the other crew had on offer.


Goodwin is representative of the hysterical Left, which thinks there is a magic wand that comes along with the Presidency.

I'd say it's better to be patient through times of restructuring than to bitch the entire way through, as long as I agree with the fundamental end result. I'll let my blood pressure get raised by other things, like the goddamned Cubs. Those who disagree with a public option have a reason to complain, but those who support it... well, the public option is still being proposed, right?

Good morning Cockface. Back for more?

Good morning Cockface. Back for more?

#16 | Posted by Libs_R_Below_Me

Time for you to go on vacation, dipshit.

#11 A Shithead

Leave the room if you're going to fart.

The Democrats ran on change and thus far have either embraced Bush policies (Iraq, rendition, wiretaps, stimulus package) or has embraced his tactics (fear, the time for debate is over, either see things my way or shut up). Obama needs to break free of the DNC and quick. We voted for Obama, not for the DNC vision of America.

#13 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Sweet potato pie for Doc. Right after those tax cuts for 95% of the people.

The mentatlity of the left on display. IMHO, this is what it really all boils down to. Conservatives believe that the people know best, while liberals look to the governement for everything.
#8 | Posted by Libs_R_Below_Me

Good. Then shut up. Obama and the Dems dominate Congress. The Left won. The vast majority voted them, their beliefs, and their values in. Its over. If the people know whats best and vote for it, then get out of the way of National Health Care and other items on the liberal agenda. The people voted for it, so let the Dems give it to them.

"Time for you to go on vacation, dipshit."

Ahh, another stalker. My fan base continues to grow.


Scrumplet -

It must suck to think that every day for the next three years and change you are going to be reminded that your boy is under-qualified, unprepared, and (best of all) a monumental failure. Don't worry though, I want to make sure that I am here to remind you every time you are intellectually inconsistent or dishonest.

Since I can feel your pain and anguish all the way over here...I will forgive your shrill first grade response....I am sure that is all you are capable of....well that and mindlessly voting dem and crying when that doesn't workout .... again!

"The Left won"

Really? Or did people vote AGAINST fake-ass Conservatives?

Hmmm....

Really? Or did people vote AGAINST fake-ass Conservatives?



I honestly believe Obama won for two reasons- he was not a Republican and he was not Palin. McCain lost the moment he picked her. The right can pretend all they want that she didn't put Obama in the White House, but reality does not agree with them.

Good. Then shut up. Obama and the Dems dominate Congress. The Left won. The vast majority voted them, their beliefs, and their values in. Its over. If the people know whats best and vote for it, then get out of the way of National Health Care and other items on the liberal agenda. The people voted for it, so let the Dems give it to them.

#21 | Posted by Sycophant

It just doesn't work that way in this Country and it never has. What he said on the stump and what he's doing now is the problem.

What he said on the stump and what he's doing now is the problem.

We only have one party in the country- the "Bait and Switch" party.

"I honestly believe Obama won for two reasons- he was not a Republican and he was not Palin. McCain lost the moment he picked her." - Kan

I agree 100%

#23 D- Citizen

You should go to the bathroom; it smells like you're ready for a number two.


Nah, I think that is your president you're smelling.

UNLIKE STATERUN MEDIA

this is too important to leave on backpage

AXLEROD...owned part of company and then quit
gets big paycheck....that company benefits from govt TAX money


lets see.


where have we heard that before


oh yeah..something about cheney and what WAS It called..oh yeah HAliburton..


gee that caused a fuckin riot when that came out didnt IT???


anyone read about a riot yet???????????

Good. Then shut up. Obama and the Dems dominate Congress. The Left won. The vast majority voted them, their beliefs, and their values in. Its over.

#21 | Posted by Sycophant at 2009-08-20 10:57 AM | Reply | Flag:
---------------
Two years ago it was democracy in action to criticize the president, but now that the Great and Holy Messiah is in office, you are supposed to shut up.

Don't you dare voice an opinion that was not approved by NewSpeak!

By the way, Sycho (it's spelled Psycho) I keep asking assclowns like you why the Democrats don't just do what they want? You got the White House, and a majority in both houses.

What the fuck are you waiting for? For too many years the excuse was always that the Republicans were in charge. Oh poor babies! Playing the victim card.

Every time I ask it turns to crickets!

What's your excuse this time?

What people believe and what's reality are often far separated from each other.

So, you can't measure Obama (or anyone) by what the perpetually ignorant and misinformed masses BELIEVE.

He's exactly what you elected.. a left wing radical, with no leadership experience, whose ideology was shaped by Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright.

You got exactly what you voted for.

#31 Afunkblah2

Axelrod was the Vice President of the U.S. pushing for war so that his defense contractor buddies (of whom he used to be CEO for) could make bank?

Yes, he is exactly the fraud you elected....

We only have one party in the country- the "Bait and Switch" party.

#27 | Posted by kanrei

Yep.

Really, I think most people are complete morons. these are the same people that got in over their heads with variable rate mortgages that they could not afford. Or tune into news at 5, to find out how grapefruits can kill you. Obama is 'trying' to do what he promised. The ignorant masses are buying into the hysteria fabricated by the stupid media and right wing clowns. Obama seems to be trying to calm people down and compromise, which will be his downfall.. he's fucking try to help these assholes.. I'm really starting to not give a shit...

"Goodwin is throwing in the towel too early. Obama wasn't just going to walk into the White House and immediately get everything he wanted from Congress. Since he admits that D.C. is a sinkhole, he should not be surprised that Obama is having trouble in it."

You have a point about what Washington can do to someone whose intentions are good, but it would help if Obama would speak earlier, more simply and directly to the nation about what he has in mind. He is sounding like John Kerry these days, wonkish as hell. And the White House press office does a lot of talking, handing the rabid right stuff it can then spin. If Obama had gone on TV four months ago and summed up his vision for healthcare in fifteen minutes, with no bureaucratese, just simple everyday conversational language, we might have been spared much of the media horseshit that has gone on recently.

You throw out a bureaucrat's phrase like "public option," you're going to open the floodgates for interpretation, much of which will come from your political enemies. If you say, "We're going to create a Federal insurance company that people can choose to use, because we want to set a standard of fairness to consumers that all insurers will eventually have to follow. We want to end the claim denials and caps that people have to contend with today. No one will HAVE to use the Federal company, but EVERYONE will have access to it," that's a statement people can understand.

GOODWIN, is a Right Wing wack job who's opinion is not worth the paper he works for, the FOX OWNED NYPOST....We do not need LIMBAUGH, HANNITY, ORIELLY, ROVE OR THE REST OF THESE RACIST FUCK DECIDING the Obama Presidency after 8 months, GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!!!!!!!

RACIST FUCK Celisary

Very lucid argument-- as your posts always are.. ever tried going to school?

Obama is a very intelligent person, and in being one, it is easy to underestimate the stupidity of people. Great points Marty! Obama would have been better off spelling it out for people in simplistic talking points that commoners can comprehend. Health good...savings good, no insurance evil, must be stopped, bringing down economy, helping Alkaida.

Marty = Mary

Axelrod was the Vice President of the U.S. pushing for war so that his defense contractor buddies (of whom he used to be CEO for) could make bank?

#35 | Posted by Scrumplet at 2009


ITS JUST as I said

both were with companies
they both left those companies
they both got money while in WH from those companies
both companies got tons of money

cheney and haliburton are STILL talked about today


and axelrods SON still works there........dont EVEN try and deny a conflict of interest....

this story will 'disappear' soon.....

Well, he met the evil controllers of the world, they told him how it is going to be, and suddenly he realizes he is not in control and change is not going to happen.
You'd be depressed also.


GOODWIN, is a Right Wing wack job who's opinion is not worth the paper he works for, the FOX OWNED NYPOST....We do not need LIMBAUGH, HANNITY, ORIELLY, ROVE OR THE REST OF THESE RACIST FUCK DECIDING the Obama Presidency after 8 months, GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!!!!!!!

#40 | Posted by celisary at 2009-08-20 11:34


its so nice and comforting for some things to remain the same regardless of the issue...of the time of day..or of anything else.

one thing you can always count on.

you are a kook!

AFK,

Pot...... kettle...... black.....

Pot...... kettle...... black.....

#47 | Posted by schmanch at 2009


okay okay....I get it....

but surely you arent putting me and celisary into the same pot.....I dont think so.......

This must be the rightwing circle jerk thread. LOL. Enjoy the next seven and a half years losers.

but I agree with MORE AND MORE posters here all the time on this "LIBERAL" site....

this is EXACTLY the man we elected..
its not the man that the MEDIA ALLOWED us to see or even talk about but .

well let me just use a good old standby line

TOLD YA SO
TOLD YA SO
TOLD YA SO

65 percent might believe health care reform will make things worse but that doesn't mean they are right or are even telling the truth.

#5 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-08-20 09:10 AM | Flag: Supports Dems who took Single Payer off the table and are giving us a half ass faux reform that doesn't resemble the successful European systems

and scha

if we were in the same pot I would have answered your post not with a polite salute to your cleverness but I would have written it a
LITTLE SOMETHING LIKE THIS


YOU sonaBITCH...you CALLIN me a POT...and that BLACK comment you RACIST FUCKER...are you calling me A FUCKIN NIG.....you PRICK>....


(HEY I kind of like that in a demented sort of way).....LOL

Obama has found out that the Republican party is much more dirty than he thought they were. You can't unite a bunch of sorry liers, pubs who ran as dems and true democarats. Obama has found out that this country is really run by big oil, insurance companies and PHARMA, the billion dollar lobbies that line the PUB parties pockets. The USA has the most corrupt government in the world.

#53 | POSTED BY JOELABEY


I think he was aware that the country was run by insurance companies when they gave him $8 million for his campaign. If I had $8 Million to give him, the country would be run by me!

Liberals and Conservatives don't really believe anything. They are party shills. When their party has the government, then government is good. When the other party has it, then its bad. Its no more complicated than that.


As for Obama, he was a bullshitter before the election. Don't be dissappointed in him. Be disappointed in yourself for expecting something different.

65 percent might believe health care reform will make things worse but that doesn't mean they are right or are even telling the truth.

#5 | Posted by klifferd

Doesn't mean they are wrong either.

Please show me a government that is a success. The Post Office? Medicare? Medicade? Social Security? Hell, they can't even run cash for clunkers.

Ahh, another stalker. My fan base continues to grow.

#22 | Posted by Libs_R_Below_Me

Enjoy your 3 week vacation, asshole.

Hahahahaha.

"The following users are currently suspended from posting: Libs_R_Below_Me, bashthis."

"Please show me a government that is a success."

Why? Pointing out Medicare and SS are the envy of the world for their efficiency isn't enough. And pointing out efficiency and funding are two separate issues doesn't sink in. You just want to piss in someone's cereal.

After all is said in done, a fairly silly thread. Health reform is coming, and before 2010. It's coming because it's needed, and because there will be the votes for it.

Further, it the recession ends this year, millions of people WILL see Obama as a messiah of sorts and there WILL be a second term.

Sorry to let the air out of anyone's balloon.

***"Really, I think most people are complete morons. these are the same people that got in over their heads with variable rate mortgages that they could not afford. Or tune into news at 5, to find out how grapefruits can kill you. Obama is 'trying' to do what he promised. The ignorant masses are buying into the hysteria fabricated by the stupid media and right wing clowns. Obama seems to be trying to calm people down and compromise, which will be his downfall.. he's fucking try to help these assholes.. I'm really starting to not give a shit..."***QUAL70

So using your very same reasoning, the ignorant masses elected this president. Great arguement.

Come on. You did elect the Obama who campaigned. You just discounted all of the information available concerning him and his background.

Obama has associated himself with ultra leftists and racists from the get go. How about "revolutionary terrorist" Bill Ayers of Weather Underground notoriety (and of course Ayer's wife, a fellow member of the group).

How about the racist bigot Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whom Obama identified as his friend and mentor for some two decades. This is the Rev. Wright whose organization gave awards to worthies such as Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Black Muslims, an anti-white group. And remember that Rev. Wright has a long record of denouncing and hating America, white folks, and Jews particularly. Any "qualms" concerning this background were repressed. You knew.

Obama associarted with the corrupt Chicago Democratic Machine, and did favors for and was repaid by Revko in a deal that was published. You folks knew Obama was corrupt and tainted. Obama's wife had her salary tripled and received a title upon his earlier election to another office. Coincidence?

Michelle reflected her alienation from white America by her thesis and statements that she was never comfortable at college despite the gracious and kind treatment she received, reflecting hew own inner angst rather than the welcoming and inclusive external reality. She stated that her lifelong goal would be to advance blacks preferentially. Hmm.

Obama had Islamic roots and training as a youth. He traveled to Pakistan as a college student with Islamic friends at a time when such travel was prohibited for American citizens. Obama went as a foreign national on a foreign passport.

Obama never bared his birth certificate, passport and itinerary, and school records showing the financing of his education and his grades, which information was routinely provided by most Presidential candidates.

Frank Davis, Obama's chosen surrogate father, was an actual Communist Part apparatchik. Obsama's mother was a convinced ultraleftist.

You knew him alright. You just allowed yourself to be gulled and discounted the information as if with him his background and the grievances that he carried would not be material to and would not be manifest in his actions.

So you chose an untested inexperienced person, who had functioned as a racially motivated street agitator because he was "what Joe Biden said," as if this somehow qualified him for the Presidency. So now we have a confused somewhat inept man, who is a narcissistic sociopath further compromised by neurological and psychiatric problems, serving as President. Well, you white folks who chose this particular unqualified, untried, and unproven individual may have atoned for your white guilt, and now its time to "Move On."

There were many well-qualified black candidates such as Dr. Thomas Sowell and Dr. Walter Williams. but they are relegated to the background and clowns such as Obama, Rev. Al Sharpton, and Rev. Jesse Jackson are presented as the face of black folks in America. A shame. But you knew darn well what you were getting. You just couldn't believe it. As with Hitler, observers scoffed at the idea that he would seriously pursue the fringe policies that he presented.

"Come on. You did elect the Obama who campaigned."

You betcha!


Golly gee whiz, Gomer!

Most people just find a bucket or a sink instead of vomiting their vile, bigoted lunch right on the thread.

"Cleanup on aisle 3!"

Although I agree with the title of this article I don't agree with the article.

If this commentary is representative of your admiration than you seriously lack intellectual thought about this subject.

The Devil is in the details.

The Obama administraiton is not tuned in to reality. They presume that their nostrums will automatically resolve themselves successfully without the need for vetting and planning their introduction.

The "Cash for Clunkers" program is an example of this unnecessary "rush to implemnentation" as if a 10 day planning period during which a novice adminstrative assistant could have inaugurated a viable process, would have been an obstacle and a redundancy. Now look at what we have.

The same attempt to rush to judgment with a stealth program passed as "a mystery" to even those voting on it, is an example of the deception of this administration.

Does anyone think that the 1000+ page health care legislation was written overnight? Come on. And yet it did not see the light of day until it was presented to be passed unexamined.

"They" know what is best for you, and what you "should" want.

#63 | Posted by Corky at 2009-08-20 01:46 PM

Most people just find a bucket or a sink instead of vomiting their vile, bigoted lunch right on the thread. (Bolding added.)

Gosh Corky, someone so displeased could respond to content. But since you can't refute the content, you introduce a couple of words from your inflammatory semantic armory to discount what was posted?

Vile? Whatever that is in this context?

Bigoted? Huh?

What is it Corky? Are you in the "Baffle 'em with bullshit" mode?


"Come on...."

And you yawned when it was pointed out the Patriot Act pre-existed.


"They know what is best for you; they know what you want...."

Don't give me that crap after eight years of Bush. You ate it up like a baby with a bib.

-But since you can't refute the content

I think a Congressman the other day mentioned efficacy of debating what amounts to a, "dining room table."


-Vile? Whatever that is in this context?
Bigoted? Huh?

If you miss that in your post, you are blind as well as deluded.


Ahhh. No sh!t. Obama's been lying through his f@cking teeths since day one.

Both Canada and Britain have a much lower GDP per person ratio, and can not afford to provide the level of health care that America could spending the same percentage of our GDP that they do.

It is an invalid comparison to say that America, if it spent 10% of GDP per person on single-payer health-care would have the sort of problems Canada has, since America's per capita GDP is 50% higher than Canada's. A system like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and France all enjoy would be well enough funded in the U.S. that we would not have wait periods.

Ironically, we already do have wait periods here, and on life-saving treatments, not just elective surgery. I read recently of a case of a 17-year-old girl in Glendale, California, Nataline Sarkasian. Nataline had leukemia, and was scheduled for a critical liver transplant, when Cygna HealthCare decided she was too sick with the leukemia to justify the transplant (talk about your death panels!). By the time an upswelling of public outrage and scathing newspaper articles caused Cygna to retreat, it was too late, and Nataline died in December of 2007. There are many thousands of examples of this type of for-profit 'death panel' medicine.

[England is a different case, since it is a truly socialized health system, not a private health system with a 'socialized' single-payer insurance to pay the private doctors and hospitals. NOBODY in America has put forth a proposal that we emulate their underfunded NHS (though, ironically, the Brits' continually demonstrate in polls that they prefer NHS to our own system)], so the UK doesn't even figure in our discussion.

We are now paying something like 17% of GDP on health care and we are getting such staggered levels of care that some people have gilt-edged treatment, while tens of millions have no insurance at all, and most people in the middle are under-insured and won't realize it until they become catastrophically ill and their insurance company shafts them.

cont...

...cont.

I know - when I had a Stage 3+ colon cancer in 1997, my gilt-edged private insurance (costing me $1,300 a month as an independent consultant) not only refused to pay for many bills they had okayed before treatment, but actually tried to get back money they had at first paid to doctors and hospitals. I was lucky that most of the insurance company's shenanigans came after my surgery and my life was saved by a brilliant surgeon (who I am still paying).

It is easy to cherrypick certain illnesses where one country or another has better or worse survival rates. Since no country has achieved perfect care, by careful selection, you can paint ANY country's medical system as better or worse than it is.

The truth is that at least tens of thousands of people die each year in this country for lack of primary care due to being uninsured, not getting help until their illnesses are too far along to be reversed. Many more get inadequate treatment because of the multitude of tricks and gimmicks that insurance companies use to deny needed care.

The best measures of a country's health care level are at both ends of life. America has the worst infant mortality rate in the advanced world. We also have the highest percentage of children who die before their first birthday, and also before age 5. And, we score worst in overall lifespan - sometimes by as much as 3 to 5 years over single-payer systems. In addition, statistics on healthy and productive life span (the age at which you are still able to function well and enjoy life) show America again far behind the rest of the advanced world.

Corky . . . Wasn't there a show on ABC about a retard named Corky? Perhaps one and the same? JD

"Perhaps one and the same....?"

That passes for humor in Hog Wallow?

Johnson posted:

The "Cash for Clunkers" program is an example of this unnecessary "rush to implemnentation" [sic] as if a 10 day planning period during which a novice adminstrative [sic] assistant could have inaugurated a viable process, would have been an obstacle and a redundancy. Now look at what we have.

How ironic that a program that everybody not dangling over the edge of the reactionary right-wing fringe acknowledges was a spectacularly successful program that had a dramatic and immediate positive effect on the long-suffering domestic auto industry (not to mention getting thousands of polluting clunkers off the road) should be chosen by the wingnuts as an example of the 'failure' of progressive policies.

The only thing wrong with "Cash for Clunkers" is that even its creators never realized how dramatically successful it was going to prove, and so, didn't put ENOUGH money into the first round.

Only in the mind of a right-wing wackaloon would an example of a program that far exceeded its expectations in every respect be an example of failure.

I think that the wingnuts still left in the Republican party not only all fell out of stupid trees when they were kids, but hit every branch on the way down.

I heard of such a show from the jack-offs like yerself who might watch such a thing.

But my handle was my Dad's nickname, something which many of the actual long-time Members here know.

But I wouldn't expect a newbie troll, if that's what you are, named "rhadts1", to know that.

btw, is that what your girlfriend Orly calls you, "rhadts1"?

Both Canada and Britain have a much lower GDP per person ratio, and can not afford to provide the level of health care that America could spending the same percentage of our GDP that they do.

#70 | Posted by BlueSun at 2009-08-20 02:03 PM

Both Canada and Britain have Single Payer systems, which isn't what the Dems in congress are proposing. In fact, Single Payer was taken off the table, by the Dems. Sorry, but Single Payer success stories can't be used to show that the current proposals in Congress are going to be successful, since the current proposals AREN'T Single Payer.

How ironic that a program that everybody not dangling over the edge of the reactionary right-wing fringe acknowledges was a spectacularly successful program that had a dramatic and immediate positive effect on the long-suffering domestic auto industry (not to mention getting thousands of polluting clunkers off the road) should be chosen by the wingnuts as an example of the 'failure' of progressive policies.

#74 | Posted by BlueSun at 2009-08-20 02:13 PM

In terms of pollution reduction, climate experts have said that the cash-for-clunkers program's effect is a "blip." Not very successful.

In terms of another bailout for the auto-industry on borrowed money and an early Christmas for people who chose to be irresponsible in purchasing gas hogs, it's a wonderful success.

Johnson posted:

Obama has associated himself with ultra leftists and racists from the get go.

So, please explain to me why Obama is siding with the Blue Dogs and trying to include conservative Republicans, while telling the left to shut up and not rock the boat. He has so alienated the left that he is under a barrage of criticism from the progressives for his failure to stop "don't ask, don't tell," his advocacy of "preventive detention," his use of Bush-style signing statements, his total failure to go after the Bush administration war criminals, his continuation of the war in Afghanistan, his putting masses of our money into saving Wall Street (and Goldman Sachs in particular, which is now even bigger than AIG - another 'too big to fail' menace) instead of fulfilling his campaign promise of saving Main Street, his reluctance to nationalize failing financial institutions, his complete failure to correct the internal flaws of our banking system that created the crisis, his deal with Big PhARMA in exchange for dropping government bargaining over drug prices in the health bill, his refusal to endorse gay marriage, his Justice Department submitting a brief in support of the Defense of Marriage Act, his refusal to provide White House visitor lists of all the corporate lobbyists to progressive watchdog groups, his appointments of lobbyists and Bush-era conservatives (just about his entire military and national security teams are Republicans).

The fact is that, wackaloon ravings about William Ayers aside, the left can't point to a single significant progressive move Obama has made since he took the oath. The only reason he has any support from the left is that the only alternative to Obama is the clinically paranoid and psychotic collection of bull goose loonies left in control of the once-great Republican party.

[BTW, the panel that Obama and Ayers served together on in Chicago was sponsored by Reagan friend and life-long Republican Walter Annenberg. Annenberg's wife Lenore, another close friend of Reagan (and his former Chief of Protocol), also served on the same panel and ran the foundation. At the time Obama was working with Ayers, many Republican philanthropists were also involved. Apparently, what Ayers did in the '60s didn't bother Republicans who worked with him - until they (and Hillary Clinton) were looking for sticks to beat Obama with.]

In fact, Lenore Annenberg, who sat at the same table with both Obama and Ayers, was a major funder of John McCain's campaign and was on his short list for an ambassadorship if he won - but I didn't hear any Republicans wailing and whuffling about the McCain-Annenberg-Ayers linkage.

Wrong, Live or Die. The program spurred an improvement in domestic auto sales for the first time in years. Consider that over 3 million jobs are directly or indirectly related to the domestic auto industry and any improvement to the sales figures directly impacts all of them.

Also, the clunkers you refer to are older cars that were not irresponsible choices at the time they were bought. Newer cars put out about one twentieth the pollutants of the older cars, but the economic collapse that accompanied Bushonomics, turning dire in the fall of 2007, made it impossible for many to get rid of the clunkers and afford a new car. These people were choosing to keep their aging cars another year or two because of the economic uncertainty. The Cash for Clunkers subsidies swung the balance and helped revive our most critical domestic industry.

A knowledgeable analysis of recessions since the end of WW II will show that improvement in the auto industry is the primary leading indicator and spur of economic turnaround.

So, argue all you want. You are simply wrong to attempt to minimize or discredit Cash for Clunkers. Rarely has so little money produced so much of a stimulus effect.

And, after Bush's tax cuts failed to deliver their promise of spurring revenues (revenues went up 7 cents for every dollar cut - some trade-off, don'tcha think?), nobody on the right still has the credibility to criticize the Democrats, who once again, as Clinton did after Reagan/Bush41, have to come in and clean up the steaming pile of economic horse puckey that Republicans left festering on the rug of the Oval Office when we tossed them out on their asses.

Actually, RHADTS is an acronym that is older than my 47 years of age. It stands for Royal Hawaiian Association of Dart Throwers and Shooters.

As for being a newbie, I can assure you that I have been the only person on the Internet and on the BBS's before the internet that uses this moniker.

I have been running College bulletin Boards since the late eighties (back in the 300 kilobaud era) and running my own web sites and servers for more than ten years, back before we lived in a point and click computer environment. When you actually had to know how to program a computer to get it to do anything.

You can google "rhadts" and "rhadts1" and find posts in chats and discussions that go back to Compuserve and Prodigy, which for shitheal kids like yourself predate AOL.

Again, if you doubt my veracity, I would advise you to go visit my website, which has been up in one form or another for more than 15 years, long before you Obamatrons decided to open your mouths and post your mindless drivel all over the internet.

John@brokencountry.com

Wrong, Live or Die. The program spurred an improvement in domestic auto sales for the first time in years. Consider that over 3 million jobs are directly or indirectly related to the domestic auto industry and any improvement to the sales figures directly impacts all of them.
#79 | Posted by BlueSun at 2009-08-20 02:50 PM
I.E. a successful bailout for the auto industry on borrowed money, like I called it.

Also, the clunkers you refer to are older cars that were not irresponsible choices at the time they were bought.
#79 | Posted by BlueSun at 2009-08-20 02:50 PM
You mean all of the SUVs and large pickups that accountants and soccer moms were driving and subsequently turning in were responsible purchases?

So, argue all you want. You are simply wrong to attempt to minimize or discredit Cash for Clunkers. Rarely has so little money produced so much of a stimulus effect.
#79 | Posted by BlueSun at 2009-08-20 02:50 PM
The use of hyperbole in regards to this program is absurd. Another sacred cow of the Obamatards.

Now back to the discussion at hand. As I have said before, I do not like either political party, but I do believe that the democrats refused to support Obamacare.

You can all name call and attack the people that protested at the town hall meetings, but trust me when I say this. I attended two such town hall meetings and there were as many democrats there as there were republicans and both sides were equally angry about Obamacare.

What seemed to be the biggest issue was the insolvency of Medi-care and Obama's flat out refusal to address the corruption of Medi-care.

It seems that most people want that fixed first before allowing any new legislation on health care.

John@brokencountry.com

#80

Then I suggest you look up Ray and Goatman here, as I understand that pedantic know-it-alls get along well together.

You wouldn't like me. Besides being a Dem, I CEO an IT firm and worked with many of the Silicon Valley greats in the late 70's, early 80's in SW R&D.

"""""Michael Goodwin: Where have you gone, Barack Obama? Where is the sunny-side-up young man who promised to inspire and unite an unhappy nation? Gone into the partisan sinkhole of Washington, that's where.""""
-----------

What moron thought he would be non partisan? Every FACT said he was radically left and a "true believer". Only an idiot could be surprised at anything he is doing, including left wingers who thought he would risk his own power or legacy by ending wars. All leftists like the absolute power of life and death after all.

Heck, he is even in bed with big oil just like Bush. He just happens to be paying George Soros back for all the bribes . . ah . .I mean support.

So I guess oil is bad for global warming and all, unless that is, it is good for a friend who bought your election, or say, any other country but your own.

Yea . . . only a moron thinks a politician under ANY label, right or left, is anything other than a politician. That was kind of the point of "limited government" . .rational men have known how corrupt these snakes are for a few thousand years, much less a few hundred.

Always makes me smile that "progressives" are working so hard to repeat the past.


"Actually, RHADTS is an acronym that is older than my 47 years of age. It stands for Royal Hawaiian Association of Dart Throwers and Shooters."

Stuff a pineapple in it, dummy.

-which for shitheal kids like yourself predate AOL.

These morons breed like rabbits.

Some times the people don't know what is good for them and that's why we have elections so leaders choose.


#5 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-08-20 09:10 AM |



Unfuckingbelievable.

Where'd you go to skool?

Never mind. I don't give a shit.

What country did you immigrate from?

And if you did in fact immigrate to the United States from another country I pray you as yet haven't been granted citizenship. You obviously don't understand the constitution and how a REPRESENTATIVE republic is designed to operate.

Sorry man . . . My veracity had been called into question and I thought it might be a good idea to explain who I was, lest anyone think I am some kind of party toady. I am not. Again, I actually have a website that has been up longer than most of these neophytes have been alive.

john@brokencountry.com

How about him reading what he is pushing on us.
He was voted in by people that just hated Bush.

I have been down the "name calling" road more times than I can remember. Shitheal is actually a term I lifted from Artie Lange, of the Howard Stern show. It seemed appropriate for the people that are currently trying to drive me away.

john@brokencountry.com

And now Obama's health care reform has been shot down by people that hate him . . . some of which actually voted for him.

#74 | Posted by BlueSun

Just a few observations. This tax payer funded program, paying up to $4,500 per car, designed to get "clunkers" off the road and replace them with more environmentally friendly cars is a success? First of all, this was about boosting auto sales, particularly GM sales, not the environment. This was at best a temporary boost. What happens when the money runs out? Sales will tank, and GM isn't going to start making better cars between now and the end of the program. Even if they did, until the economy picks up to the point where the average person is seeing some benefit and can afford new cars without assistance, sales will be down, and this will be nothing more than a tax payer funded blip on the radar. Phase two of the auto bailout.

As for Obama, he was a bullshitter before the election. Don't be dissappointed in him. Be disappointed in yourself for expecting something different.

#55 | Posted by sully at 2009-08-20 01:07 PM |


Needed reposted.

"Actually, RHADTS is an acronym that is older than my 47 years of age. It stands for Royal Hawaiian Association of Dart Throwers and Shooters."

Stuff a pineapple in it, dummy.

Wow. I know you have problems with lots of thing, null, but now acronyms? Geeez, get a life.

LiveOrDie posted:

Both Canada and Britain have Single Payer systems, which isn't what the Dems in congress are proposing. In fact, Single Payer was taken off the table, by the Dems. Sorry, but Single Payer success stories can't be used to show that the current proposals in Congress are going to be successful, since the current proposals AREN'T Single Payer.

True, in part - though Britain doesn't have a Single Payer insurance system, but a truly socialized government-run health establishment. Under the Canadian and other single-payer insurance systems, the health delivery system of doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, and clinics remain in the private sector.

But, you make my larger point about how the right are lunatics to call Obama a 'socialist' and a 'leftist.' Would a true progressive, whether socialist or not, take the only health care policy favored by the left off the table, in favor of keeping the private insurance companies gorging themselves at the expense of our health?

I'm not defending Obama - in fact, I think he is far, far to middle-of-the-road to even be considered liberal. I blame Obama for continuously backing away from every proposal that he feels might make it harder for him to create a bi-partisan relationship with the radical right that now runs the Republican party. He hasn't realized yet that the Republicans are going to demonize and attempt to destroy EVERY Obama initiative, not because it is in the interest of their constituents or the country to do so, but solely because they believe that if they aren't running the country, nobody else will.

The politicians, PR firms, and pundits know full well that all this fearmongering over death panels, socialism, fascism, government takeover, forced abortions, and such (I even heard a pundit claiming that a provision to pay for in-home nursing care was just a trojan horse for getting socialist agents into your house to hunt for your guns!) is nonsense. They are relying on the real fear of change and the long-honed gullibility of those who get most of their news, opinions, and 'truth' from the right wing noise machine in order to sucker you into doing their bidding and destroying their, and their corporate masters', opposition.

Then I suggest you look up Ray and Goatman here, as I understand that pedantic know-it-alls ...

Followed by:

...I CEO an IT firm and worked with many of the Silicon Valley greats in the late 70's, early 80's in SW R&D.

#83 | Posted by Corky at 2009-08-20 03:05 PM |

in the same post.

YOu can't make this stuff up

Geeez, get a life.

#94 | Posted by goatman at 2009-08-20 03:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Go troll someone else, ankle-biter.

Go troll someone else, ankle-biter.

OK, Mr acronym hater. LOL

Go troll someone else, ankle-biter.

#97 | Posted by nullifidian

And you call me Mini-Mao?

;-)

LoD,

The DNC watered-down the single-pay thing because the public is staunchly opposed to it. Their "stated" intent is to pass a public 'option' and have it morph into a single-pay system. Achieve their power-grab incrementally and patiently. It's very much akin to the rise of a Sith Lord.

LoD,

The DNC watered-down the single-pay thing because the public is staunchly opposed to it. Their "stated" intent is to pass a public 'option' and have it morph into a single-pay system. Achieve their power-grab incrementally and patiently. It's very much akin to the rise of a Sith Lord.

#100 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-08-20 03:40 PM

I think that if they don't attempt single payer now, they're going to have a hard time adopting it later. Am I alone in thinking that Dems have a once in a life time majority capable of passing such legislation? What sucks to me is that our "reform" is going to be half assed and problematic because they're relying on it being incremental.

"I think that if they don't attempt single payer now, they're going to have a hard time adopting it later"

Lets get real for a moment.

Right now, between Medicare, Medicaid, government employees, the VA, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 40% of Americans are on a "single-payer" plan. This percentage will only increase as the baby boomers retire. With the government on the hook for that much, and the administrative costs between public and private insurers so huge (4% vs 30%), we will someday -- soon -- have no other choice.

If someone can show me -- using the macro numbers -- how I'm wrong, I'm all ears.

Am I alone in thinking that Dems have a once in a life time majority capable of passing such legislation?

No. You are not alone on this. Far from it.

This is what I find to be so fascinating. The DNC has the power to get this done. They don't need support. They have the power. Yet, this is stalled.

Why can't the DNC get their shit passed when they have huge majorities in both houses of congress, the White House AND a fawning press????

Lets get real for a moment.

Right now, between Medicare, Medicaid, government employees, the VA, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 40% of Americans are on a "single-payer" plan. This percentage will only increase as the baby boomers retire. With the government on the hook for that much, and the administrative costs between public and private insurers so huge (4% vs 30%), we will someday -- soon -- have no other choice.

#102 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-08-20 04:04 PM

I'm not saying we won't come to that point. I have no argument with what you've posted here. I'm saying that when we do hit that point, we may not have the people in Congress willing to put all Americans on a single payer system; that now is the time if they're going to do it. Do you think the Democrats are going to maintain the leads they have now for very long, even if they hold on to a majority and the presidency?

I understand the politics; that not all Democrats support a single payer system, but the man at the top isn't really pushing it either, nor is Reid, Pelosi, etc.

LoD,

Please don't take this the wrong way...

the government option is FAR from the only way of reducing costs...costs that Danforth accurately points out.

"Do you think the Democrats are going to maintain the leads they have now for very long, even if they hold on to a majority and the presidency?"

Good God, no. Nor do I want it. My favorite form of government is gridlock.

"not all Democrats support a single payer system, but the man at the top isn't really pushing it either, nor is Reid, Pelosi, etc."

They're politicians, not leaders. And that may be the biggest problem of all. As Americans, we can't handle the truth, so we keep electing folks who will pretend the light at the end of the tunnel isn't really an oncoming train. Have you heard ANYONE addressing the intractable factors, like the precipitous drop we're about to experience in payer-to-user ratios?

"the government option is FAR from the only way of reducing costs..."

But what it will do is offer a counterbalance to being at the insurance companies' mercy.

Remember after 9/11, when health insurance rates skyrocketed? Was it because doctor pay rose quickly? NO. Because costs jumped unexpectedly? NO. Some other health-related reason? NO.

Was it because the companies still had guaranteed annuity contracts to pay out, and they couldn't get the returns from CDs or the stock market? DING!

Everyone else was hurting back then. With a government option, the insurance companies would have had to take some of the burden on as well. Instead, the citizenry got the shaft. With medical inflation sure to spike as the baby boomers jack up demand, we need something.

LoD,

Please don't take this the wrong way...

the government option is FAR from the only way of reducing costs...costs that Danforth accurately points out.

#105 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-08-20 04:16 PM

I agree with that. A user posted a list of suggestions a few times that I think would go a long way toward reducing costs. I would be totally open to that debate and I usually favor a more conservative approach to solving problems, but that solution, IMO, lacks leadership. I.E. a person or group widely known and respected out there pushing it, advertising it, and campaigning hard on it. The GOP is perpetually dropping the ball on this issue; they're too busy opposing instead of proposing.

I meant to add that because of that lack of leadership, I don't foresee any serious consideration of a conservative approach to reform coming from Congress in the near future.

"A user posted a list of suggestions a few times that I think would go a long way toward reducing costs."

That was Somoco. AndreaMackris also had a good list. They both deserve kudos.

Both President Obama's health care plan and his presidency are going down the toilet.
This is well, and right, and just as it should be.
Obama is turning out to be a disastrous president, wholly unsuited for the times and our national and global challenges, and his job approval ratings reflect this.

In Obama, we get all the corporate toadying of the last Democratic president, along with an even greater unwillingness than Clinton and who would've thought that was possible to name names, call out enemies, and throw a freakin' punch every other year or so. (We're also getting a continuation of the civil rights and civil liberties policies of Dick Cheney, as an extra added bonus, but that's another story.) What makes it even more astonishing this time around, however, is that we've seen this movie before, and we know how it ends. There is apparently absolutely no bottom as the events of recent weeks have reconfirmed to the pit of vicious lies, brutal tactics, and democracy-demolishing antics of which regressives will avail themselves in their practice of contemporary American politics. In addition to not being prepared for that, Barack Obama is still seemingly unable to raise his voice a decibel or two against the very people who are helping him to destroy his own presidency. Indeed, he is negotiating bipartisan' (read: total capitulation) deals with them, even as they relentlessly trash him before a national audience.
Is this president so deluded that he believes there are limitations on what the right will do not only to the republic, for which Obama seems to have only passing regard, but also to his presidency, for which we might imagine he would have at least some concern?

Suffice it to say that both the insurance and pharmaceutical industries are now spending hundreds of millions of dollars running ads on television in favor of healthcare "reform". I can hardly think of a more pure litmus test for determining whether this is good legislation or not. If those guys are for it, and especially if they're spending millions to make it happen, it's a very safe bet that the deal is they get rich and we get nothing.

Barack Obama has given us the worst of all worlds. Passage of a healthcare reform bill even something barely remotely worthy of the name now seems like a dubious proposition. If it does pass, it won't be worth squat.
I will say, however, that you seem to be a very, very nice young man. Yes, yes very nice indeed. Definitely.

So much so that I give you my word: If I ever want someone for my president who is so nice that he even lets vicious political savages tear him to shreds while they're wrecking the country at the same time...

I promise that you'll have my vote.

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York.

That was Somoco. AndreaMackris also had a good list. They both deserve kudos.

#110 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-08-20 04:41 PM

Agreed. Much better discussion than ZOMG DEATH PANELZZZZ!!!

Would a true progressive, whether socialist or not, take the only health care policy favored by the left off the table, in favor of keeping the private insurance companies gorging themselves at the expense of our health?

Contains conclusions that are not validated.

If the government health care plan which the Obama-ites tried to slip in in the middle of the night, unvetted, had passed, why we might have a program that provided us with all of the efficiencies evident in the rushed "Cash for Clunkers" program. Wouldn't that be ducky?

The premises that the insurance company profits are "the cause" for inflated costs and denial of care is fallacious.

For example "Big Pharm" is blamed for exorbitant RX costs when the retailers seem to be the real profiteers. I shopped four prescriptions for a lady the other day. These were generic drugs. For a 90 day supply without insurance, one ranged from $18 to $384. Another which is also available over the counter at a greater cost, ranged from $31 to some 35. Another ranged from $7.62 to $207. And the last one ranged from $20 to $167.

Get with it. $18 to $384. a retail cost range of $366 for a 90 day supply of a particular medication. Some 20 cents per pill per day to some $4.06 per pill per day. Give me a break. And it is THE RETAILER, and not the pharmaceutical company, whoch could raise a defense of development costs and the like.

Something else is rotten. And a long and deliberate review of the healing industries is merited with some novel solutions needed. Delivery of care can be imporved and the cost grossly reduced.

TIME FOR A THIRD PARTY

IN 2012, I MEAN :)

Screw a third party, we need a second.

AND A FOURTH

if repubs get congress back and they dont do what conservatives are supposed to do..I think the country will be more apt to go to a third party since in a long long time....

too bad all of these excuses and not yets only apply to obama, bottom line this is not what most people expected, but they should have. and no we dont have to let him decide, by the people for the people, and the people are telling their elected REPRESENTATIVES, no!!!

But I have to tell you I'm ever so much happier now that W. is gone. It's likely Obama will have to skin and eat kittens after dashing their little brains out before I pine for the "good old days".

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2009-08-20 09:32 AM | Reply | Flag: another compassionate libtard

Is that the way our HNIC eats pussy?

That people are suprised by his clearly being in over his head amazes me.

We elected a guy who (other than admiteddly impressive academic achievement and winning a couple elections) has accomplished exactly nothing.

Never signed the front of a paycheck...never had to meet a payroll or balance a budget (obviously)...No real record to speak of in the State Senate...even less of a record in the US Senate (and this guy voted against both Roberts and Alito...for reasons he couldn't describe). He is the crown jewel of the Chicago political dirt machine who gives great speaches...nothing more.

Barack Obama has turned into exactly the president nearly half of the country that voted against him knew he would be. No surprise!

More news in from USATODAY updated 2hrs ago:

"The Obama administration expects the federal deficit over the next decade to be $2 trillion bigger than previously estimated, White House officials said Friday, a setback for a president already facing a Congress and public wary over spending."

www.usatoday.com


$2 TRILLION higher!!! Unf@ckingbelievable!!! Did someone miss a comma or two in that budget? Can this lame asswipe moron President do anything right?

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable