So the most ethical, most transparent administration ever owes us nothing?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
|
So the most ethical, most transparent administration ever owes us nothing?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Pay attention. He doesn't owe you AN APOLOGY every time he does something.
excon
Ex, I don't believe I actually asked for one, you're the one who said he was acknowledging mistakes and I asked when did he do so? He's not acknowledging HIS mistakes and doing so doesn't necessarily require an apology. He has no problem apologizing to the world for everything someone else supposedly did, but I don't see where he's acknowledged any of these mistakes OR stuck to his principles. He seems awfully wishy-washy to me.
My favorite lib thinks it's not the President ,but groupthink, collective blindness and a failure of critical thinking from the people he surrounds himself with that explains the President's missteps .(this would also post well in Elliot's OP about 5th generation politics )Quote:
but I don't see where he's acknowledged any of these mistakes OR stuck to his principles. He seems awfully wishy-washy to me.
Too late for Obama to turn it around? | SalonQuote:
I am outraged at the slowness with which the standing army of Democratic consultants and commentators publicly expressed discontent with the administration's strategic missteps this year. … letting Congress pass that obscenely bloated stimulus package … a cap-and-trade bill whose costs have made it virtually impossible for an alarmed public to accept the gargantuan expenses of national healthcare reform …
Why did it take so long for Democrats to realize that this year's tea party and town hall uprisings were a genuine barometer of widespread public discontent and not simply a staged scenario by kooks and conspirators? First of all, too many political analysts still think that network and cable TV chat shows are the central forums of national debate. …
Quote:
Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers (one reason for the hypocritical absence of tort reform in the healthcare bills). Weirdly, given their worship of highly individualistic, secularized self-actualization, such professionals are as a whole amazingly credulous these days about big-government solutions to every social problem. They see no danger in expanding government authority and intrusive, wasteful bureaucracy. This is, I submit, a stunning turn away from the anti-authority and anti-establishment principles of authentic 1960s leftism.
Has the Democratic Party even noticed they've become detached from ordinary Americans?Quote:
Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans?
You mean the ordinary americans they are trying to provide healthcare for?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
No, those ordinary evil (Harry Reid), un-American (Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer), swastika carrying, astroturfing (Nancy Pelosi) "political terrorists" (Baron Hill) that don't even deserve the courtesy of not being interrupted by taking calls on your cell phone (Sheila Jackson Lee).Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Dude, you're detached!
Dude, another one right over your head, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
No, not the 3% of Americans that they want to provide healthcare for.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
They are detached from the 67% of Americans who don't want Obamacare.
Elliot
Actually 84% of the american population does want universal healthcare.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Where'd you get that number from.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Every single poll is in agreement that 67% of Americans are against Obamacare.
84% of Americans are in favor of some sort of reform of the healthcare system. MOST of them are in favor of things like tort reform, lower health care premiums, tax incentives, portability, etc. They are in favor of increased accessability for those who cannot afford health care. Who wouldn't be in favor of these things?
But very few are in favor of any form of government-run health care, much less a single-payor system that everyone is forced into.
Elliot
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:25 AM. |