Whatever Happened to Concern for Foreign Oil Dependency ?

[GB-Hack]

Obama is too busy reading teleprompters and giving silly speeches about college student loans and taxing banks to realize he's already won the election and at some point he's going to have to, you know, actually do something, anything that resembles productivity.

So which is it Zag? You want him to actually do something, get legislation passed, and bring the change he was promised to do by all the hypemongers out there?

Or do you want him to slow down and actually craft the legislation so that it makes sense and works. Because you original post seemed remarkably dissatisfied that he hadn't gotten anything done so far.

Is it hard talking out of both sides of your mouth? Because it seems like you've become a walking GOP talking point machine.

 

[fishhack2009]

You are joking right?

The whole damn idea of "healthcare legislation" is Obama kissing up to left-wing lobbys and the unions - it is classic "class warfare" and if Obama really wanted to solve some of the issues with healthcare he'd be looking to rollback many regulations and laws on the books which have destroyed the system in the first damn place.

Obama tried hard to show he was a champion for the left wing organizations who elected him by taking on health care first -- instead of really taking a long look at it, studying it, listening to advice from non-political people and then putting forth a piece of legislation that makes sense.

Instead, he -- along with the democrats in congress - keep flipping and flopping, rewriting and revising -- not because they want to solve the problem or fix the system but instead because they want to find a way to get it to pass and then claim some sort of hollow victory.

You're not providing answers to your original assertion.

How could he have (a) actually solved/fixed the problems and (b) done so at a reasonable cost.

No, don't put words into my mouth and then try to make ridiculous "gotcha points'....

My original assertion is that the healthcare legislation is poorly crafted and mostly because Obama was far more concerned with getting it passed - then claiming some sort of ridiculous hollow victory -- then he was with actually fixing or solving whatever issues he or anyone else believes need to be fixed.

That is a fact that cannot even be argued.

As for how to fix or solve the problem, I don't know that we've ever clearly and honestly defined what exactly the problem is -- which is why crafting together bad legislation is putting the cart before the horse.

Calling people "Stupid" and "Ignorant" is no way to advance your argument, Zag. You've got some good points ... but they're negated by your pissy tone. Try again, without the crap.

 

[GB-Hack]

Who did I call names?

Don't play this game with me and don't act stupid, or if you want to go to that other place where nobody ever disagrees and anyone who does disagree is labeled a troll and then they actually celebrate the fact that their ignorance is bliss......

Again, who did I call names? I didn't call anyone names and your cut and paste proves it.

You said I was acting stupid, and then decided to yet again go off on a tangent about something that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

It seems you are as concerned with tweaking people on here as having a serious discussion. As such, I am done here.

 

[zagoshe]

Who did I call names?

Don't play this game with me and don't act stupid, or if you want to go to that other place where nobody ever disagrees and anyone who does disagree is labeled a troll and then they actually celebrate the fact that their ignorance is bliss......

Again, who did I call names? I didn't call anyone names and your cut and paste proves it.

You said I was acting stupid, and then decided to yet again go off on a tangent about something that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

Exactly, I didn't say you were stupid, because I know you are not, I said you were acting stupid and you were because you were trying to play that silly gotcha game which is both an old and tiresome ploy in these forums and every bit as much a deterrent to good discussion as the trolling and name calling and pissing matches that people engage in.

 

[zagoshe]

Obama is too busy reading teleprompters and giving silly speeches about college student loans and taxing banks to realize he's already won the election and at some point he's going to have to, you know, actually do something, anything that resembles productivity.

So which is it Zag? You want him to actually do something, get legislation passed, and bring the change he was promised to do by all the hypemongers out there?

Or do you want him to slow down and actually craft the legislation so that it makes sense and works. Because you original post seemed remarkably dissatisfied that he hadn't gotten anything done so far.

Is it hard talking out of both sides of your mouth? Because it seems like you've become a walking GOP talking point machine.

OK, once again stop trying to play gotcha and put words in my mouth......

I want President Obama to be the kind of politician I thought he was -- a guy who is thoughtful and visionary, a guy who could make REAL changes and have the courage to stand up to the lunatic lefties in his party and move things forward.

I am disappointed, not because he hasn't done anything, but because all he has done the same kind of silly cosmetic political crapola that will neither change anything, fix anything or solve anything.

He hasn't changed a thing about Washington, the way we do business and the way we do politics other than continue to try and make it more expensive and more expansive.

I have no problem with "health care reform" if it is actually legitimate healthcare reform, unfortunately it is legislation designed to (a) pass and (b) allow a politician to run around the country claiming victory regardless of what the consequence of the legislation actually is....

If you need a recent example of this see Bush, George and Iraq war resolutions.

 

[zagoshe]

Come on, Zag. This is the kind of bull**** that got the politics board shut down. GB asked you a legitimate question. How about trying to answer it in a thoughtful way instead of calling people stupid and resorting to name-calling?

Who did I call names?

And my answer is exactly what I said -- Obama crafted together the legislation in a way he thought it would pass instead of taking a look at the issue and putting together something that might actually fix the problems.

I don't think there is really even any way to debate or argue that point.

The speed with which he tried to hammer the thing through -- no doubt because he knows it will be DOA if it makes it to another session of congress which won't be so favorable to him -- tells you everything you need to know about how well thought out it was.

How could he fix anything if the proposed fixes wouldn't pass Congress?

'Crafted the legislation in a way he thought it would pass'?

Uh ... duh? That's how it works.

That is exhibit A as to what is wrong with our current system - we write bills in order to get them to pass and create sound bytes instead of bills that actually will do what they are intended to do.

And I thought if ever there was a politician with the vision and political capital to pull it off, it was Obama.

But so far, he's failed, miserably.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Yes, who among us can't recall those bygone days when Zag used to wax poetic on here about how Obama was a different kind of politician who was going to be a visionary and point the country in a whole new direction. It was amazing how much he cast all cynicism aside during the election of 2008 and heaped praise on the Democratic candidate.

:

 

[fishhack2009]

Yes, who among us can't recall those bygone days when Zag used to wax poetic on here about how Obama was a different kind of politician who was going to be a visionary and point the country in a whole new direction. It was amazing how much he cast all cynicism aside during the election of 2008 and heaped praise on the Democratic candidate.

:

Nothing like revisionist history, huh?

 

[Boom_70]

You are joking right?

The whole damn idea of "healthcare legislation" is Obama kissing up to left-wing lobbys and the unions - it is classic "class warfare" and if Obama really wanted to solve some of the issues with healthcare he'd be looking to rollback many regulations and laws on the books which have destroyed the system in the first damn place.

Obama tried hard to show he was a champion for the left wing organizations who elected him by taking on health care first -- instead of really taking a long look at it, studying it, listening to advice from non-political people and then putting forth a piece of legislation that makes sense.

Instead, he -- along with the democrats in congress - keep flipping and flopping, rewriting and revising -- not because they want to solve the problem or fix the system but instead because they want to find a way to get it to pass and then claim some sort of hollow victory.

You're not providing answers to your original assertion.

How could he have (a) actually solved/fixed the problems and (b) done so at a reasonable cost.

No, don't put words into my mouth and then try to make ridiculous "gotcha points'....

My original assertion is that the healthcare legislation is poorly crafted and mostly because Obama was far more concerned with getting it passed - then claiming some sort of ridiculous hollow victory -- then he was with actually fixing or solving whatever issues he or anyone else believes need to be fixed.

That is a fact that cannot even be argued.

As for how to fix or solve the problem, I don't know that we've ever clearly and honestly defined what exactly the problem is -- which is why crafting together bad legislation is putting the cart before the horse.

Seriously zag we are trying to have some decent discussions on important matters.

You raise some good points that get lost in your hostile tone.

 

[zagoshe]

Yes, who among us can't recall those bygone days when Zag used to wax poetic on here about how Obama was a different kind of politician who was going to be a visionary and point the country in a whole new direction. It was amazing how much he cast all cynicism aside during the election of 2008 and heaped praise on the Democratic candidate.

:

Nothing like revisionist history, huh?

Go back and read the political threads -- I consistenly said that Obama was the one guy who, if any of them had a chance to make real change, it was him.

I was disappointed.

 

[zagoshe]

You are joking right?

The whole damn idea of "healthcare legislation" is Obama kissing up to left-wing lobbys and the unions - it is classic "class warfare" and if Obama really wanted to solve some of the issues with healthcare he'd be looking to rollback many regulations and laws on the books which have destroyed the system in the first damn place.

Obama tried hard to show he was a champion for the left wing organizations who elected him by taking on health care first -- instead of really taking a long look at it, studying it, listening to advice from non-political people and then putting forth a piece of legislation that makes sense.

Instead, he -- along with the democrats in congress - keep flipping and flopping, rewriting and revising -- not because they want to solve the problem or fix the system but instead because they want to find a way to get it to pass and then claim some sort of hollow victory.

You're not providing answers to your original assertion.

How could he have (a) actually solved/fixed the problems and (b) done so at a reasonable cost.

No, don't put words into my mouth and then try to make ridiculous "gotcha points'....

My original assertion is that the healthcare legislation is poorly crafted and mostly because Obama was far more concerned with getting it passed - then claiming some sort of ridiculous hollow victory -- then he was with actually fixing or solving whatever issues he or anyone else believes need to be fixed.

That is a fact that cannot even be argued.

As for how to fix or solve the problem, I don't know that we've ever clearly and honestly defined what exactly the problem is -- which is why crafting together bad legislation is putting the cart before the horse.

Seriously zag we are trying to have some decent discussions on important matters.

You raise some good points that get lost in your hostile tone.

Hostile? You are joking right?

I took a few light-hearted shots at some obviously thin-skinned people who no longer exist around here, but my tone has not been hostile, nor have I engaged in pissing matches.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Boom, I don't know if you agree with me or not, but the answer seems to be nuclear power. I can't imagine your a huge reader of Mother Jones magazine, but they did a great energy issue a couple years ago, with W. still in office, and nuclear was by far the most sensible option. The problems are the expense to get it started and the safety stigma.

I read an article on Slate a few months ago about how linguists are at work trying to figure out how to signal to future civilizations not to touch this **** (our waste), it will kill you.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Oh, please, Zag. Give it up. You spent 18 months haranguing mercilessly anyone on here who supported the guy's candidacy.

 

[fishhack2009]

Boom, I don't know if you agree with me or not, but the answer seems to be nuclear power. I can't imagine your a huge reader of Mother Jones magazine, but they did a great energy issue a couple years ago, with W. still in office, and nuclear was by far the most sensible option. The problems are the expense to get it started and the safety stigma.

I read an article on Slate a few months ago about how linguists are at work trying to figure out how to signal to future civilizations not to touch this **** (our waste), it will kill you.

i'd agree, Waylon. If we can ever get past the safety stigma and the expense, nuclear is worth a shot again. I just don't know how we do that ... especially the safety side.

 

[zagoshe]

Oh, please, Zag. Give it up. You spent 18 months haranguing mercilessly anyone on here who supported the guy's candidacy.

Well of course I did and I ripped the policies of McCain and Palin and Romney as well -- but I also conceded that I was more excited about Obama than anyone else in the field because he seemed like a different politician than the crap we've had for years and years -- and I also wrote a number of very long posts celebrating his victory because of what it meant historically, both politically and for racial relations.

So stop trying to stir this **** up and move forward with the discussion.

 

[zagoshe]

And as an aside I've said many times that nuclear, wind and solar energy should be explored to the fullest of their capabilities but the oil companies have far too much to lose and far too much ability to wield their influence on our government to let it happen.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Oh, please, Zag. Give it up. You spent 18 months haranguing mercilessly anyone on here who supported the guy's candidacy.

Well of course I did and I ripped the policies of McCain and Palin and Romney as well -- but I also conceded that I was more excited about Obama than anyone else in the field because he seemed like a different politician than the crap we've had for years and years -- and I also wrote a number of very long posts celebrating his victory because of what it meant historically, both politically and for racial relations.

So stop trying to stir this **** up and move forward with the discussion.

You spent a year and a half making fun of anybody who was voting for him as "Kool-Aid drinkers" and "lefties" and whatever other adjective you could pull out of your jolly bag of insults. Because in your mind, only you have the proper amount of healthy cynicism to have an opinion on government.

 

[Boom_70]

Boom, I don't know if you agree with me or not, but the answer seems to be nuclear power. I can't imagine your a huge reader of Mother Jones magazine, but they did a great energy issue a couple years ago, with W. still in office, and nuclear was by far the most sensible option. The problems are the expense to get it started and the safety stigma.

I read an article on Slate a few months ago about how linguists are at work trying to figure out how to signal to future civilizations not to touch this **** (our waste), it will kill you.

Ironically nuclear power is the answer. It is the most efficient clean source of power. Emits zero CO2 gases - a major source of ozone layer burning.

Ironic in that organizations like Green Peace who fought against nuclear power now have a dilemma.

 

[zagoshe]

Oh, please, Zag. Give it up. You spent 18 months haranguing mercilessly anyone on here who supported the guy's candidacy.

Well of course I did and I ripped the policies of McCain and Palin and Romney as well -- but I also conceded that I was more excited about Obama than anyone else in the field because he seemed like a different politician than the crap we've had for years and years -- and I also wrote a number of very long posts celebrating his victory because of what it meant historically, both politically and for racial relations.

So stop trying to stir this **** up and move forward with the discussion.

You spent a year and a half making fun of anybody who was voting for him as "Kool-Aid drinkers" and "lefties" and whatever other adjective you could pull out of your jolly bag of insults. Because in your mind, only you have the proper amount of healthy cynicism to have an opinion on government.

No, I called those who really were Kool Aid drinkers - i.e. never questioned anything Obama said or did and got extremely defensive when called out for it -- Kool Aid drinkers.

That is called fair comment and criticism.

 

[printdust]

Obama is too busy reading teleprompters and giving silly speeches about college student loans and taxing banks to realize he's already won the election and at some point he's going to have to, you know, actually do something, anything that resembles productivity.

After one year and some change in office he is well on his way to becoming the biggest disappointment among presidents in the history of the United States.

I say disappointment because he came in with so much hype and so many, including me, had high hopes that he was indeed a different kind of politician who is really interested in changing things -- instead he's proven to be just another clueless partisan foof who is more interested in passing legislation to claim hollow victories than passing legislation which will actually change or fix problems.

Obama's got a long way to go before he surpasses W in disappointment ... you know, the guy who was going to be a "uniter, not a divider."

But the man who was going to heal all wounds when he was elected, the agent of change, hasn't exactly soared like an eagle.