The Atheist Communist Caliphate Made Flesh, Spread the Clusterfuck Around Thread

[morpheus]

I've resisted commenting on the recent brouhaha in Massachusetts for fear of looking like a partisan hack.  I don't root for Democrats and Republicans like I root for the CUBBIES!! and Hawks.  However, I do root for the team that has a genuine interest in improving the safety and welfare of the nation, rather than simply saying no.

At the moment, I believe that there is a strong chance that the House will swallow the bitter pill known as the Senate bill, giving the president a legislative accomplishment he can hang his hat on.  Beyond that, I believe, as 538 does, that the president and the Congress will push hard to the center and pass measures that have only 50%+ support.  It is very difficult to say to the average voter that your government is trying to do things for you when you're out of work and the Congress is talking about climate change and other liberal initiatives.  How does that get Joe Average a job anytime soon?

So, what happens in 2010 and beyond is hard to say.  Republicans will probably slim the majorities considerably, but I doubt they'll retake either the House or the Senate.  And 2012, so much depends on things that haven't happened yet.  

I expect the President to continue to tack towards the center, the Congress to get very populist, and Republicans to continue to say no to anything.  So, there.

Um, this is false and makes you look exactly like the partisan hack you are trying to avoid appearing to be.  Do you really believe that only one party has an interest in improving the safety and welfare of this nation?  That's ridiculous, and shame on you for saying it.  

Yeah, you'd never catch a Republican doing that.

Nice irrelevant but true statement.

[Quality Start Machine]

I've resisted commenting on the recent brouhaha in Massachusetts for fear of looking like a partisan hack.  I don't root for Democrats and Republicans like I root for the CUBBIES!! and Hawks.  However, I do root for the team that has a genuine interest in improving the safety and welfare of the nation, rather than simply saying no.

At the moment, I believe that there is a strong chance that the House will swallow the bitter pill known as the Senate bill, giving the president a legislative accomplishment he can hang his hat on.  Beyond that, I believe, as 538 does, that the president and the Congress will push hard to the center and pass measures that have only 50%+ support.  It is very difficult to say to the average voter that your government is trying to do things for you when you're out of work and the Congress is talking about climate change and other liberal initiatives.  How does that get Joe Average a job anytime soon?

So, what happens in 2010 and beyond is hard to say.  Republicans will probably slim the majorities considerably, but I doubt they'll retake either the House or the Senate.  And 2012, so much depends on things that haven't happened yet.  

I expect the President to continue to tack towards the center, the Congress to get very populist, and Republicans to continue to say no to anything.  So, there.

Um, this is false and makes you look exactly like the partisan hack you are trying to avoid appearing to be.  Do you really believe that only one party has an interest in improving the safety and welfare of this nation?  That's ridiculous, and shame on you for saying it.  

Yeah, you'd never catch a Republican doing that.

Nice irrelevant but true statement.

So you have the same indignation toward Cheney doing it as Gil? If you don't, then it's relevant as a motherfucker.

[Gil Gunderson]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

[morpheus]

So you have the same indignation toward Chekey doing it as Gil? If you don't, then it's relevant as a motherfucker.

This is your standard M.O., Fork.  "They all do it."  For the record, I don't think that the left doesn't have an interest in said safety and improvement, OK?  I believe that the left's policies will not bring it about, but that's another story.  And if Cheney said something to that effect (which I don't know about) then he was wrong to say it.

[Gil Gunderson]

DPD, "Death Panels," "Obama's a Muslim," and "I want my country back" are also unacceptable answers.

[Oleg]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

WRONG!  Most of those don't even exist!

[Quality Start Machine]

So you have the same indignation toward Cheney doing it as Gil? If you don't, then it's relevant as a motherfucker.

This is your standard M.O., Fork.  "They all do it."  For the record, I don't think that the left doesn't have an interest in said safety and improvement, OK?  I believe that the left's policies will not bring it about, but that's another story.  And if Cheney said something to that effect (which I don't know about) then he was wrong to say it.

Have you been in a cave? He's called Obama a traitor, accusing him of "giving aid and comfort to our enemies". He said in 2004 if John Kerry was elected, we'd get attacked again. His douchebaggery is pretty well chronicled.

And I'm not using the "they all do it" argument. I'm using the "Morph is being pretty selective in his outrage" argument.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

That's not a good question.

Some of that stuff the GOP has no interest in for various reasons.  Climate change and regulatory reform being two of them.

A better question is: What does the GOP see in being a problem with:

1) Getting insurance companies 30 million new clients without having the government provide insurance
2) Talking to Arabs like grown ups
3) Asking the financial institutions that took government money to pay it back, and placing a slightly heavier burden on those that are "too big to fail"
4) Stimulus in a demand crunch, 1/3rd of which was in the form of tax cuts
5) Medicare cuts of 1/2 a trillion dollars
6) Sotomayor on SCOTUS
7) No card check
8) DADT and DOMA still in effect
9) More troops for Afghanistan
10) GITMO still open

All that sounds pretty centrist to me.  Maybe if a GOP had proposed it....

Nah.  That would be cheering for uniforms.

[Gil Gunderson]

I should note that IF there is an alternative that addresses these problems that the Republicans have been keeping secret in the inner recesses of their unholy sanctums, then I will retract my statement, but what was 2009 if nothing but death panels, muslin presidents, fake climate change, teabaggers and NO!!!?

[R-V]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Allow me:

Deregulate the industry so insurance companies can sell across state lines. Malpractice reform.
Not caused by man, so no point in doing anything.
Cut Medicare costs, unless the cuts are proposed by Democrats.
Tax cuts. Tax credits.
Deregulate/leave John Galt alone.
Win it.
Win it.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Let's ask it this way:

Fine, you hate where the country is going. Where is it going that you don't like?

And what part of that is Obama's fault and what part wasn't the fault of his predecessors?

[morpheus]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Gil... you approach this whole thing as if government is the solution to all problems.  If you view the world through that prism, then you will always find a conservative or smaller-government party lacking (and I also wonder whether the GOP is such a party, given its performance during the Bush years).  But anyway, let's play the game your way.

1) The GOP proposed an alternative which simply removed the state monopolies on insurance and added some malpractice caps.  That's not "nothing."  It may not be your preferred solution of a complete government takeover of questionable constitutionality, but it's not nothing.

2)  Climate change... what should we do?  Cripple the world economy, transfer huge amounts of wealth from developed to developing economies, all based on "science" that is more corrupt than the Haitian government?  Um, I vote no.

3)  Spiraling Medicare costs.  A tough nut to crack, but you assume that the Democratic proposal will tackle this.  Sure... by assuming that the "doc fix" will not happen.  i.e.: Pretend.

4) Unemployment.  THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS.  The government can only take resources from one sector and transfer them to another.  I will never understand why this simple fact of basic economics gets past people.  You want the government to create jobs?  Tell the government to get the fuck out of the way.  Businesses are not hiring right now because they are scared to death of the increased costs of doing business.  That's not just me talking.  See page 6 of this.

5) Financial regulatory reform.  What do you have in mind?  A tax on banking transactions (that will ultimately hurt consumers of banking services, since like all taxeds the ultimate cost is borne by the consumer)?  Perhaps stricter oversight of Fannie and Freddie?  Oh, wait, that was proposed during the Bush years and shot down by "roll the dice" Barney Frank.  Anything else?

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

[Jon]

Will everyone please be quiet? I'm still listening to the hush fall over the room.

[SKO]

For the record, Morph has a point. Gil, whether he meant to or not, was being partisan by saying that he felt only one party cares about the welfare of the nation. The Republican Party's been reeling this year. No, it doesn't have a lot of ideas right now. God knows anyone that's been around me understands my frustration with that. The thing is, not having an alternative is still no excuse to vote for bad ideas. Just because the Obama plan is the only one out there that deals with health care reform, that doesn't mean they need to vote for it. Cheney is a douche and he's the most unpopular vice president in American history. I didn't realize that Morph needed to point out and criticize every Republican partisan hack before calling Gil on a remark he made In this forum.

[morpheus]

So you have the same indignation toward Cheney doing it as Gil? If you don't, then it's relevant as a motherfucker.

This is your standard M.O., Fork.  "They all do it."  For the record, I don't think that the left doesn't have an interest in said safety and improvement, OK?  I believe that the left's policies will not bring it about, but that's another story.  And if Cheney said something to that effect (which I don't know about) then he was wrong to say it.

Have you been in a cave? He's called Obama a traitor, accusing him of "giving aid and comfort to our enemies". He said in 2004 if John Kerry was elected, we'd get attacked again. His douchebaggery is pretty well chronicled.

And I'm not using the "they all do it" argument. I'm using the "Morph is being pretty selective in his outrage" argument.

I have yet to see anything in your argument that addresses my statement to Gil, which was about a political party and not the actions of one individual.