Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
My biggest complaint about Obama supporters is that when you criticize Obama they often immediately retort byt comparing him to George W. Bush. As though a statement criticizing Obama automatically exalts dubbya. This compounds my frustration with how Obama campaigned again Bush more than the actually candidate against whom he was running.
For the record I voted neither democrat or republican, so don't assume that a criticism of his campaign is a statement in support of McCain either.
In all fairness, a lot of the criticisms I have read about Obama have often included either a comparison to Bush or atleast a small reference so it immediately pops into the mind to say "yeah, well atleast it's a step up from Bush in regards to... "
And plus, it's just easier to make fun of Bush than it is to defend somebody who you don't entirely understand their thought processes in decisions
My biggest complaint about Obama supporters is that when you criticize Obama they often immediately retort byt comparing him to George W. Bush. As though a statement criticizing Obama automatically exalts dubbya. This compounds my frustration with how Obama campaigned again Bush more than the actually candidate against whom he was running.
For the record I voted neither democrat or republican, so don't assume that a criticism of his campaign is a statement in support of McCain either.
In all fairness, a lot of the criticisms I have read about Obama have often included either a comparison to Bush or atleast a small reference so it immediately pops into the mind to say "yeah, well atleast it's a step up from Bush in regards to... "
And plus, it's just easier to make fun of Bush than it is to defend somebody who you don't entirely understand their thought processes in decisions
I'm speaking of conversation either in person or online not things that you have read.
Having never defended Bush's actions this has no baring on what that to which I am referring. And as a matter of fact you are one of the people who did exactly what I'm talking about in a previous post, making references to current "headlines" about Obama vs. those about Bush. I put them in quotes because you never sited them with links or dates and it seemed like you just made them up for the sake of agrument. Judging by the last sentence of your pot above, I think it's likely that you did.
If someone did make a comparison of Bush and Obama in their initial contention then to compare the two in response is topical if not necessary. If it were a stand alone criticism of Obama then it's pointless.
kel...don't you get started too! i post on enough sites where these kinds of conversations get completely out of control because neither side can just accept that they will disagree, or are too worried about semantics to really see the point the other is trying to make.
why would you expect nothing less from an obama supporter? in texas, i can't tell you how many awful things i've been called because i'm liberal. so, in my experience, i would expect nothing less from a bush supporter, or a mccain supporter, etc.
but we shouldn't EXPECT that stuff from anyone. we should be able to discuss with respect. just makes me sad when the personal attacks start getting thrown around on this board of all places
kudos! very well stated. now all if all those who smited me for having a different opinion could just exalt me, then that will be a step in the right direction
as for obama being a socialist, he is bailing out all of these huge banks and companies, and by doing that, the govt owns a part of that business. he is planning on "nationalizing" healthcare. the govt will tell doctors what they can charge, and who will receive what service, and when (if you are a 78 yr old person, who has developed some rare disease, cant afford to pay for it, the govt will deem you unworthy because of age). and lets not forget, basically giving the lower classes more money (to make more babies and spend frivolously instead of trying to help their situation), taking away from those that actually earned it (went to school, stayed with a job for x-amount of years, etc). and thats just in the first three months. who knows what else govt will take care of in the next 45 months+. i know, i know, true capitalist talking.
In all fairness, a lot of the criticisms I have read about Obama have often included either a comparison to Bush or atleast a small reference so it immediately pops into the mind to say "yeah, well atleast it's a step up from Bush in regards to... "
And plus, it's just easier to make fun of Bush than it is to defend somebody who you don't entirely understand their thought processes in decisions
I'm speaking of conversation either in person or online not things that you have read.
Well tell me sir, how do you get your information from online? Most people choose to read it, that's my preferred method, atleast
Having never defended Bush's actions this has no baring on what that to which I am referring. And as a matter of fact you are one of the people who did exactly what I'm talking about in a previous post, making references to current "headlines" about Obama vs. those about Bush. I put them in quotes because you never sited them with links or dates and it seemed like you just made them up for the sake of agrument. Judging by the last sentence of your pot above, I think it's likely that you did.
If someone did make a comparison of Bush and Obama in their initial contention then to compare the two in response is topical if not necessary. If it were a stand alone criticism of Obama then it's pointless.
I thought that a master of sarcasm and humor such as of yourself would catch the lack of sincerity and joking intentions I conveyed in my posts. I mean, I even gave you a couple of to help! Perhaps I suck at being funny
kel...don't you get started too! i post on enough sites where these kinds of conversations get completely out of control because neither side can just accept that they will disagree, or are too worried about semantics to really see the point the other is trying to make.
why would you expect nothing less from an obama supporter? in texas, i can't tell you how many awful things i've been called because i'm liberal. so, in my experience, i would expect nothing less from a bush supporter, or a mccain supporter, etc.
but we shouldn't EXPECT that stuff from anyone. we should be able to discuss with respect. just makes me sad when the personal attacks start getting thrown around on this board of all places
kudos! very well stated. now all if all those who smited me for having a different opinion could just exalt me, then that will be a step in the right direction
as for obama being a socialist, he is bailing out all of these huge banks and companies, and by doing that, the govt owns a part of that business. he is planning on "nationalizing" healthcare. the govt will tell doctors what they can charge, and who will receive what service, and when (if you are a 78 yr old person, who has developed some rare disease, cant afford to pay for it, the govt will deem you unworthy because of age). and lets not forget, basically giving the lower classes more money (to make more babies and spend frivolously instead of trying to help their situation), taking away from those that actually earned it (went to school, stayed with a job for x-amount of years, etc). and thats just in the first three months. who knows what else govt will take care of in the next 45 months+. i know, i know, true capitalist talking.
i think those who are quick to call him a socialist are giving him way too much credit, honestly. just because a president SAYS he'll do something doesn't mean it will happen. there are checks and balances for a reason.
i just wish more people would be willing to give him a chance before assuming he'll fail...or rooting for him to. these problems will not be solved overnight, or even in the next 4 years. and as is the case with most things, it will probably get worse before it gets better.
i'm not saying one way or the other as to whether or not i think obama is right or wrong. i just think you have to deal with the hand that's been dealt, and see how things play out before calling him a socialist.
I'm speaking of conversation either in person or online not things that you have read.
Well tell me sir, how do you get your information from online? Most people choose to read it, that's my preferred method, atleast
Having never defended Bush's actions this has no baring on what that to which I am referring. And as a matter of fact you are one of the people who did exactly what I'm talking about in a previous post, making references to current "headlines" about Obama vs. those about Bush. I put them in quotes because you never sited them with links or dates and it seemed like you just made them up for the sake of agrument. Judging by the last sentence of your pot above, I think it's likely that you did.
If someone did make a comparison of Bush and Obama in their initial contention then to compare the two in response is topical if not necessary. If it were a stand alone criticism of Obama then it's pointless.
I thought that a master of sarcasm and humor such as of yourself would catch the lack of sincerity and joking intentions I conveyed in my posts. I mean, I even gave you a couple of to help! Perhaps I suck at being funny
No strum you didn't suck at being funny. I just thought there was a more serious undertone in what you posted than there apparently was. Must be the wine I'm drinking. Either that or I suck at reading funny.
As for the "reading" reference, I thought you meant journalistic commentary like editorials, not discussion board banter. Again, must be the wine.
Post by strumntheguitar on Mar 29, 2009 17:31:50 GMT -5
^^s'all good dood. Alcohol is the only reason I ever venture into these sorts of places anyways. Otherwise I'd stick to the less serious places where it is easier to read funny
kudos! very well stated. now all if all those who smited me for having a different opinion could just exalt me, then that will be a step in the right direction
as for obama being a socialist, he is bailing out all of these huge banks and companies, and by doing that, the govt owns a part of that business. he is planning on "nationalizing" healthcare. the govt will tell doctors what they can charge, and who will receive what service, and when (if you are a 78 yr old person, who has developed some rare disease, cant afford to pay for it, the govt will deem you unworthy because of age). and lets not forget, basically giving the lower classes more money (to make more babies and spend frivolously instead of trying to help their situation), taking away from those that actually earned it (went to school, stayed with a job for x-amount of years, etc). and thats just in the first three months. who knows what else govt will take care of in the next 45 months+. i know, i know, true capitalist talking.
i think those who are quick to call him a socialist are giving him way too much credit, honestly. just because a president SAYS he'll do something doesn't mean it will happen. there are checks and balances for a reason.
i just wish more people would be willing to give him a chance before assuming he'll fail...or rooting for him to. these problems will not be solved overnight, or even in the next 4 years. and as is the case with most things, it will probably get worse before it gets better.
i'm not saying one way or the other as to whether or not i think obama is right or wrong. i just think you have to deal with the hand that's been dealt, and see how things play out before calling him a socialist.
well, i cant speak for everyone, but i will try to be a little more fair with regards to the socialist comments. what i will say is that they are socialistic in tendency. and actually, everything i stated has come to pass, or is in the process. with regards to the healthcare, did the democrats (with the help of three prostitute republicans) not pass a bill that had a "down payment" for this healthcare plan?
Post by GratefulHippie on Mar 29, 2009 17:40:26 GMT -5
i think tendencies is a better word. and i don't see anything wrong with that, honestly. to me it just means that you'd rather see to it that everyone has a fair shot at things. maybe that's a little broad, but i also think those who would like to call obama socialist are also taking things to the extreme.
i honestly couldn't tell you about the "down payment" thing.
oh, and karma...smiting is ridiculous in intances like this.
^^^i wish more people on here were as accepting as you
btw, we still on for galactic/bonerama at the swamp thing and crawfish fest this coming sat? more than likely wont be getting to austin until early afternoon
^^^i wish more people on here were as accepting as you
btw, we still on for galactic/bonerama at the swamp thing and crawfish fest this coming sat? more than likely wont be getting to austin until early afternoon
i'm always down for some mud bugs. and who would want to miss galactic??
so people will actually speak badly to you, hippie, for being liberal? im not saying i dont believe you, i dont live there. however, i would figure that in austin, the most liberal city in tx, it would be that way for anyone who was remotely conservative. very interesting
I'd like to address a couple of issues. The first I saw was over the 2 parties and how "the system" makes it near impossible for a 3rd party to run for President. Firstly, its not just 2 people that run for President. There were over 18 in 2008 not including various 3rd party candidates. Secondly, if a 3rd party were to be viable, it would then be possible to split votes 3 ways; with the winner conceivably only needing 34% of the vote. Its hard enough right now for some people to deal with a President that got 52%, now imagine if he got into office on only 1/3 of the vote.
As for national healthcare, I doubt that scenario about the 78 year old will hold true. Firstly, if the person could not afford to pay for treatment on his/her own they would not get it anyway. So why does the gov't get the blame? Also, I'm not sure how Medicaid works but does that currently happen now? If that doesn't happen to older sickly people now, why would that happen in the future?
and lets not forget, basically giving the lower classes more money (to make more babies and spend frivolously instead of trying to help their situation), taking away from those that actually earned it (went to school, stayed with a job for x-amount of years, etc). and thats just in the first three months. who knows what else govt will take care of in the next 45 months+. i know, i know, true capitalist talking.
C'mon, really? All poor people have too many kids, spend frivolously, don't have a job (or at least don't stay with the same one), and never went to school? That is BS. I get more money in my paycheck each week and I'm willing to bet you do too. Does that mean we're lower class too?
^^^with regards to the healthcare situation, the scenario is true. take a look at other countries that have the type of healthcare obama is wanting. all the people with money, especially in canada, come to the US for their healthcare. why is that, because basically when the govt controls healthcare, what it does is "ration" it out. there are committees (made of doctors and govt) that will make the decision of who receives what service, and when. when the people with money do not get the answer they want, they come here.
with regards to the lower class, you yourself stated you do some sort of social work. first off, let me rephrase my words. replace lower class with people who receive govt money, and let me replace all with most. can any social worker, who deals with govt money being issued to lower class people, honestly say that what i say is false. i can almost guarantee that many will tell you the same thing ive said. i personally have seen it, working in a doctors office where 95% of the people we see are medicaid/welfare receipients. i believe that someone on here who works in some govt job (possibly dmv) stated the same thing.
you are correct in your statement that i will be receiving some extra money. however, i am not one of the people that is sucking the breast of the govt for handouts. will i use the money, of course. does that make us lower class? i guess that is all opinion. i will not be the judge of who is lower class and who isnt. i use the term lower class loosely, and should be more specific. i am talking about those who regularly take govt handouts, and have no initiative to ever make anything better of themselves. they have become dependent on handouts, and never want to work harder, because they know govt will be there.
lets not forget, obama just fired the ceo of gm--a non-govt company. this is why obama is so quick to bail anyone out. so that way govt can do as they will with the private sector. of course, obama will disguise it and say that he had little to no involvement with the ceo's "resignation", but we all know (actually, most on here will believe the opposite) that obama wanted this. he wants new blood to restructure. im not arguing that the ceo should or should not have resigned, but the fact that he left at the "recommendation" of obama.
Post by wonderllama on Mar 30, 2009 13:08:48 GMT -5
I honestly don't understand why socialism is such a scary word in the first place. With regards to healthcare, we are the only major industrialized nation that does not have some form of socialized health care. Also we happen to pay the highest amount per person in health care expenses. Yes, you will have doctors and some government deciding who gets what service, but right now, the insurance companies are making those decisions for us. The number one cause of bankruptcy in this country is medical bills. The reason foriegn people with money come over here to get what they want done, is because they HAVE money, which will get you damn near anything you want done when you want it here if you have enough. Most people tavelling over here come get what are called elective procedures, which is why they are forced to wait at home because people with more serious needs take priority. Whereas in the US, we're denying people basic coverage based on income or pre-existing conditions.
Socialistic systems are often times necessary in large nations, expeciaslly when those institutions are needed and used by everyone in the society. Public schools, police and fire services, social security, the military, are all socialized institutions. That's why we pay taxes. I'm sure our government will find some way to screw a few things up, and corruption can infiltrate any system socialistic or capitalistic. But if we look to those nations whose healthcare system is superior to our, they all have some form of univeral health care.
so people will actually speak badly to you, hippie, for being liberal? im not saying i dont believe you, i dont live there. however, i would figure that in austin, the most liberal city in tx, it would be that way for anyone who was remotely conservative. very interesting
you forget that i went to Texas A&M. i was a part of a very small minority of liberals in town. i also post on a message board for aggies, most of which are white conservative christians. it makes even being moderate make you feel like you should burn in hell sometimes.
I'm not a social worker, so I don't know where you got that info.
As to your rephrasing: way to completely change around what you meant so as to not look like such a dick. I don't want to name-call or get personal, but I have no other way to phrase it. I respect your opinions and I cannot disagree that there are people who suckle at the teet of the gov't and milk their welfare for all they can. But we agree that it is not ALL. There are hard working people who receive gov't aid and those people can't be vilified because of the acts of others.
How can you claim that money is being taken from harworking people like yourself, yet now you're getting more money? By your own admission, doesn't that make you one of the lower class people that spends frivolously and has too many babies?
My statement about the healthcare was directed toward the fact that you stated that the 78yr old person could not afford healthcare on their own. Therefore they would receive no treatment. Under the proposed healthcare, it would be possible that they could also be denied treatment. So isn't that the same outcome either way? Does it really matter if its the gov't denying them or their own wallet denying them? And if the gov't did pay to help this old person, wouldn't there be people complaining about the rest of us paying for their medical bills?
And if the gov't did pay to help this old person, wouldn't there be people complaining about the rest of us paying for their medical bills?
I say we bring back Soylent Green to offset the Medical Costs of senior citizens. It is really the only fair way, who the heck told them to live this long and get sick anyway.
I have to back KC on this one - what he is saying was the first thing I thought of.
Also, just because "Country X" has nationalized healthcare does not mean we need to enact the same system. If there are proven problems, then we don't need to embrace the same set of policies and guidelines.
We would be better off with a "not-for-profit" healthcare system anyway.
And if the gov't did pay to help this old person, wouldn't there be people complaining about the rest of us paying for their medical bills?
I say we bring back Soylent Green to offset the Medical Costs of senior citizens. It is really the only fair way, who the heck told them to live this long and get sick anyway.
^^hahahaha. i agree. finally someone who gets it. j/k;)
We've been over this whole welfare thing a couple times already
which is why I won't jump in on the welfare bandwagon here - I have already been attacked out of no where for my opinon on that one.
But I do have to say that I definately do NOT want socialised medicine. Not many people realize that our military members have socialised medicine. This means their dependants have socialised medicine also. I was a part of that system until I was 21 years old. It sucks to not be able to choose who your doctor is or when you can be treated for an issue.
I do know that the majority of posters on here are all for health care coverage for the masses. In my mind, that just amounts to welfare.
More of the "let's sit back and let the government take care of me" type of attitude. I wanna know when I get my mortgage bailout and get reqarded for paying my bills on time. Because it seems to me:
The mortgage industry got a bailout for screwing people over The people that failed to pay their mortgages are getting second chances even though they did not pay their bills.
The auto industry is being rewarded for producing crappy cars that no one wants to buy
and the banking industry is also being rewarded for failing to run their business properly and earn a profit. We have executives that are receiving tens of thousands of dollars for their company losing money.
I say - give me my whole paycheck - let me pay for the things I deem important - housing, clothing, healthcare, food and retirement. I am tired of paying into a system that not only taxes my paycheck, but taxes my groceries, any luxury item I choose to buy - aw hell - I am taxed on everything. I honeslt cannot think of one thing that I pay for that there is not a tax attached to it already yet they still tax my paycheck.
Plus - the SS system will be bankrupt by the time I am old enough for it. I will have paid into it for my whole life and will never see a dime of it back.
which is why I won't jump in on the welfare bandwagon here - I have already been attacked out of no where for my opinon on that one.
But I do have to say that I definately do NOT want socialised medicine. Not many people realize that our military members have socialised medicine. This means their dependants have socialised medicine also. I was a part of that system until I was 21 years old. It sucks to not be able to choose who your doctor is or when you can be treated for an issue.
but if all medicine is socialized, wouldn't it be easier to find a doctor in your plan.
More of the "let's sit back and let the government take care of me" type of attitude. I wanna know when I get my mortgage bailout and get reqarded for paying my bills on time. Because it seems to me:
The mortgage industry got a bailout for screwing people over The people that failed to pay their mortgages are getting second chances even though they did not pay their bills.
the mortgage industry and the banking industry are thick as thieves in this. crazy back room deals with securities not worth the ink they were printed with sold off from one bank to the next.
however, for bailout of mortgages, everything i have seen - especially the fha program, will only reward those who managed to pay their bills. if you missed payments within the last year, you are not eligible for the fha loans.
maybe you can refi if you have missed payments, but you cant take advantage of the special programs offered by the HUD.
The auto industry is being rewarded for producing crappy cars that no one wants to buy
and the banking industry is also being rewarded for failing to run their business properly and earn a profit. We have executives that are receiving tens of thousands of dollars for their company losing money.
agreed on both points. although the banks were operating legally, they were not really looking at a big picture / long term view.
those bonuses were agreed to before the bailout was provided. they are legally entitled to the money. i dont think they should get them either, but i view it as a tiny part of the total bailout and not something we should all be focusing on.
i hope there are no bonus payouts in 2009. that's a more interesting story and i dont know if its been covered...
those bonuses were agreed to before the bailout was provided. they are legally entitled to the money. i dont think they should get them either, but i view it as a tiny part of the total bailout and not something we should all be focusing on.
The thing I don't get though is that if your company were to go bankrupt, you're SOL. Like the GM autoworker that was guaranteed a pension and healthcare after retirement. If GM bites the dust, that guy is fucked. (I know GM is a bad example, just can't think of anyone else that gives good benefits after retirement) If AIG bites the dust, those in charge still get what they're owed.
I do think healthcare should be cheaper for more people to afford, but to think that everyone deserves it is insane. People should have to pay, just like me!
I think every willing body should work, unless they have money and aren't abusing the system.
There is jobs out there, maybe not the best jobs, but it would be better then nothing and using the working people to raise your 3 or 4 kids.
I have issues with the welfare system, and yes I know this has nothing to do with Obama right now.
^Well what about Roads, Schools, Firemen, Bridges, etc.... I own a small business, and can tell you all bout taxation 35-40% or so for me. However I realize that as some money goes to "waste" a lot of it goes the greater good which is the point of taxation. The point is to elect people you think will be good stewards of the wealth. Right now neither party can claim much as far as that goes. The Republicans, have consistently shifted the tax burden onto the middle class, and deregulated several industries putting us in our current situation. However I do not agree with all of the Stimulus Package either, I do want to take Obama at his word that we are investing not only for the present, but doing important things for the future. Creating jobs at the present, and building important infrastructure for the future sounds like a worthwhile use of my money. However only time will tell, but it has already told on the Republicans, and it makes me sick when they try and claim moral high ground on the issue (Not you Meg, Rush, and Bill O'rly). I think so far his suggested taxes, mainly are shifting the burden back to the wealthy, and the people who get their money from investments, and I have no problem with that. Personally I think we should move to flat tax on income, and eliminate Capital Gains tax, however where that would drop my taxes as a small business owner by 20%, it would raise the taxes on someone who made 3 million by about 50-100%, and they are just not up for that, which is why it is lobbied against constantly.