Nope... there was no civil war tension in Iraq before we went in. As much of a crazy b*stard Saddam was, he ruled with stability.
What? How was the Iraq war not optional? Or are you saying the ACA was not optional? Both were optional.
This is the difference between you and I; I hope it works. I really do. I hope it brings down costs, I hope more people are insured, I hope all of those who have preexisting conditions finally get the help they need. But since hope and change means nothing to liberals, I will continue to hope the ACA brings world peace, ends hunger and brings forth a unicorn that farts rainbows and heals cancer. The whole website debacle is just a sideshow for whats to come. This is what will likely happen, since liberals like you have no foresight. We already figured out by now that the Affordable Care Act is not affordable at all. What we will find out next is that all those healthy young americans that are suppose to come out in the millions to supple the pool are ... well, not coming. Then once those with preexisting conditions jump aboard and bog the system, premiums will continue to sky rocket. Businesses will start dumping the insurance for their employees, thus more uninsured people, and again, further hikes in premiums. Nobody will be able to afford it except the wealthy. The poor will have their medicare. And once again, its the shrinking middle class that is screwed.
Yes, Saddam was a very gentle and kind ruler. He never hurt anyone. And the Taliban were even more kind. Iraq was not a draft. It was optional. I had two brothers join and I told them they were fools for doing it. So yes, it was optional. People are forced into the ACA or be fined. That isn't optional.
Dude, did you attend the London school of Economics??? Such a well thought out prediction Didn't know it takes a couple of months for a major piece of legislation to be considered a permanent failure. Btw, so what do YOU think we should do with those with preexisting conditions, you know those 5 year olds diagnosed with cancer? **** em right?
O please, there were WORSE dictators at the time and still are... Why aren't we going after them? And the war itself was optional. And you don't have to lecture me about the Taliban kid. People(like me) joined to serve this country, and put trust in our leadership to fight the good fight. We were wrong.
BTW Space Ghost, even if Saddam was the worst dictator of all time and the people of Iraq needed America's saving grace more than any other region on this planet, the administration's initial premise for war there WAS NOT ABOUT SAVING THE IRAQI PEOPLE. It was about Iraq being a nuclear threat to America. When that premise failed it became some quasi "Iraq was kinda responsible for 9/11" mixed in with "We saving dem Iraqis from Saddam" kinda thing.
Wreck the current health care system, ruin it for everyone and still make it not affordable for those with preexisting conditions? Here is a suggestion; Do it in small pieces. Raise medicare by 1% from income taxes. Those with serious preexisting conditions can now be covered by government doctors via medicare. Create competitive intrastate exchanges. Create preventive healthcare clinics. For $300, have a certified nurse run some basic tests. I have no problem with my tax dollars subsidizing this. Create clinics nationwide (can be done in pharmacies) where people with mild sickness can get diagnosed and medicine. $50 gets your strep throat diagnosed and some basic medicine.
This has nothing to do with saving the people of Iraq, or WMD's or Oil. The fact remains it was volunteer service. In exchange for getting shot at, mortars dropped on you daily and mind f%$# for the rest of your life, you will receive a measly few thousand dollars and a potential free education. It was a "take it or leave it". We all know people who chose to take that option.
Are you seriously legitimizing free rein to the President of the United States to start any war he/she ****ing wants because our service is voluntary
Nope, no sarcasm. But the doomsday is not caused by thoughtful conservatives. It's a class war being waged by a small group of moneyed narcissist that have appropriated the GOP. It's the same class warfare that's been going on since before the Magna Carta. "Small Government" is a euphemism for plutocracy. "Collectivism" defines the course of the Founding Fathers and democratic revolutions of the 18th century.
That statement is ridiculous. If anything, big government is plutocracy, and we're experiencing it now in droves. I'm not sure how you can make that statement, when it isn't even the case in practice. We're supposedly a democratic nation, but the choices you have at the voting booth aren't the thinkers that most of us would prefer representing us. These folks are representatives of the "moneyed narcissists" you mentioned that run both parties. They're vetted and selected by the two parties because the folks behind the scenes know that they won't make waves. These people have built up big government -- a system of laws that are not simple, that seemingly can only be deciphered by lawyers, that fill up entire libraries, and have established what university government courses refer to as "the fourth branch of government" -- because a complex and massive government helps the plutocrats maintain their wealth and world-wide influence while robbing the middle class. The "thinkers" that prescribe to small government, and I call them "thinkers" because they aren't the politicians that talk alot about small government as a guise for being a schill for the people running the two parties, don't want a government so small that it's run by a group of plutocrats, but rather, they're seeking a government that is small in terms of it's influence; a government that doesn't have the authority to make the type of legislation that diminishes the influence of the average person on government, and diminishes the separation of powers that makes the federal system work.
See, you are brainwashed by orwellian double speak In the absence of collectively organized, well meaning citizenry, power and control will be bought by plutocrats to preserve and enhance their wealth. They will (and are) subverting the will of the people wherever they can. Citizens United has opened the floodgates to a brave new world run by corporations and rich PACs. You will never know what truth is again because information is so easily manipulated by money. Money has made you think government is the enemy, but government is (or could be) just people organizing for the greater good.
I'm pretty sure Orwell didn't dream up a small government dystopia. Besides, you're right. Government should be run by a "colletively organized, well meaning citizenry," and that government would be a small government. Our system of elections, the money that controls elections, and decisions like Citizens United are biproducts of the system of big government. If I had my druthers, elections would work much differently than they do now, and your representatives would be a true representation of the average person, but that's an entirely different subject.
Same subject, the perception of Mr. Obama and of government is being manipulated by moneyed interests in order to obstruct change and maintain the status quo of low taxation and socialized risk that is exponentially increasing the wealth and power of the rich few. Incestuous corporate boards of the peerage of the 21st. century.
Seems to me that you don't really have any argument contrary to mine. I'd argue that the situation you allude to is a product of big government, and it doesn't seem that you have any response to that other than to tell me I'm brainwashed.
I put the picture of Teddy Roosevelt in there as an illustration that government should be the antithesis of plutocracy. The fact that for the last 50 years plutocratic interests have subverted the will of the people with lawyers, lobbyist, PAC's and unlimited financing does not make government the enemy. The infiltrators, saboteurs and obstructionist make it appears so because an organized citizenry is the only limits to their power. They use media manipulation, like the tea party to, flip the perception 180 degrees. We can either organize ourselves or submit. (Who am I kidding, it's already game over. They way of the world for the next 100 years will be Walmart fuedalism)
Eight years for Bush, and another eight years for Obama, two worst presidents in USA. Normal Americans just suffer from these two, but who voted those two, I predicted both of them were not good before the elections, so at least I did not vote either.
What's wrong with Mr. Obama is a an obstructionist House and massive negative PR campaign. You really can't be blamed when you can even appoint the bureaucratic positions it takes to run the government much less pass legislation. Remember "Obamacare" is the industry written compromise that could pass, by one vote. The economy is slowly recovering, the stock market is at an all time high, less US soldiers are dying. He can't pass financial regulation, campaign finance reform or even close GITMO. It's just kinda sad for him really.
