I voted wholeheartedly for Obama but...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

shadow9d9

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
8,132
2
0
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Originally posted by: Craig234

Obama is getting a hell of a lot right, but how can that be debated with the criticisms lack any points to debate, they're just about 'worrying for our nation'?

I can't even make sense of some of the comments like how they're the 'ends justify the means' crew. What ends and what means? That's help when making the attack.

Expanding the national debt even further to satisfy liberal constituencies on unproven, ill thought out policies without public scrutiny and discussion is anything but right. I'm personally happy to see some changes in the foreign policy arena but Obama's budget and economic policies will doom this nation.

What I meant to say is:

Some conservatives in the GWB presidency believed what they did was right, and the end justify the means (doing anything to deceit the public to build support for the Iraq war, for instance)

Liberals in power do the same thing: You believe that UHC is the way to go, so your reps try to push it through without public input/consultation. You think the government can fix anything so your president increases funding for most departments, even though the problem lies in inefficiency of government agencies. Your "stimulus package" involves mostly long term spending and not much short term relieve to the economy, which could be debated by itself (if the economy can really be "propped up") but your president still lied to the public about America being screwed if we don't pass his "stimulus package".

What happened to being truthful to the American people when your messiah's budget is based on unrealistic numbers on economic growth (basically lying to people who had hopium)? To push forward an agenda when we have record deficit and debt while foreigners will less likely buy our debt? Even some democrats are starting to question Obama's competency.

Lay off on the hopium and give the Obama administration the scrutiny it deserves, instead of just taking anything his administration says as truth.

The only people that use the term "messiah" are diehard republicans.

I guess GWB was YOUR "messiah."
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Congress is not incompetent in any way, shape, or form. Furthermore the opposite party is in charge of Congress as when Clinton was in office. I do find it funny however that our government working the way it's supposed to, without having a tyrannical executive dominating every part of it, is now somehow viewed as the president being weak and rubber stamping everything. You guys need to pick up a book and learn how our government is supposed to function, and then go read some newspapers and see that the executive has had a lot of input into what has been going on. Stop with the fucking extreme paranoia already.

The two branches are working together as equals, the way it's supposed to be. If you guys wanted a de facto dictatorship of the executive like we used to have, we should have just given Bush a third term.

LOL! Passing legislation you haven't read = incompetent. It's exactly the same as signing a contract you haven't read. It's almost the very definition of incompetent.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,233
55,779
136
Originally posted by: spidey07
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Congress is not incompetent in any way, shape, or form. Furthermore the opposite party is in charge of Congress as when Clinton was in office. I do find it funny however that our government working the way it's supposed to, without having a tyrannical executive dominating every part of it, is now somehow viewed as the president being weak and rubber stamping everything. You guys need to pick up a book and learn how our government is supposed to function, and then go read some newspapers and see that the executive has had a lot of input into what has been going on. Stop with the fucking extreme paranoia already.

The two branches are working together as equals, the way it's supposed to be. If you guys wanted a de facto dictatorship of the executive like we used to have, we should have just given Bush a third term.

LOL! Passing legislation you haven't read = incompetent. It's exactly the same as signing a contract you haven't read. It's almost the very definition of incompetent.

No, it's really not. You understand that's what they have staff for, right? The job of a Congressman is not to sit there reading bills all day attempting to parse the language.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: shadow9d9

The only people that use the term "messiah" are diehard republicans.

I guess GWB was YOUR "messiah."

I guess you failed at grade school reading comprehension. I didn't vote for GWB as I have stated previously. I think the current mess is the collective failure of both Democrats and Republicans for the past 15-20 years and Obama supporters like you foolishly believe that he would actually change anything for the better.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: spidey07
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Congress is not incompetent in any way, shape, or form. Furthermore the opposite party is in charge of Congress as when Clinton was in office. I do find it funny however that our government working the way it's supposed to, without having a tyrannical executive dominating every part of it, is now somehow viewed as the president being weak and rubber stamping everything. You guys need to pick up a book and learn how our government is supposed to function, and then go read some newspapers and see that the executive has had a lot of input into what has been going on. Stop with the fucking extreme paranoia already.

The two branches are working together as equals, the way it's supposed to be. If you guys wanted a de facto dictatorship of the executive like we used to have, we should have just given Bush a third term.

LOL! Passing legislation you haven't read = incompetent. It's exactly the same as signing a contract you haven't read. It's almost the very definition of incompetent.

No, it's really not. You understand that's what they have staff for, right? The job of a Congressman is not to sit there reading bills all day attempting to parse the language.

That is why a 5 day review for a billis good idea...oh never mind that was tossed out too.
 

shadow9d9

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
8,132
2
0
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Originally posted by: shadow9d9

The only people that use the term "messiah" are diehard republicans.

I guess GWB was YOUR "messiah."

I guess you failed at grade school reading comprehension. I didn't vote for GWB as I have stated previously. I think the current mess is the collective failure of both Democrats and Republicans for the past 15-20 years and Obama supporters like you foolishly believe that he would actually change anything for the better.

You could claim whatever you want on the internet, doesn't make it true. Calling a president a "messiah" as some lame attempt at bashing him and his supports are absolutely pathetic.

 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Originally posted by: shadow9d9

The only people that use the term "messiah" are diehard republicans.

I guess GWB was YOUR "messiah."

I guess you failed at grade school reading comprehension. I didn't vote for GWB as I have stated previously. I think the current mess is the collective failure of both Democrats and Republicans for the past 15-20 years and Obama supporters like you foolishly believe that he would actually change anything for the better.

You could claim whatever you want on the internet, doesn't make it true. Calling a president a "messiah" as some lame attempt at bashing him and his supports are absolutely pathetic.

Keep drinking the Obamakoolaid.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Originally posted by: Craig234

Obama is getting a hell of a lot right, but how can that be debated with the criticisms lack any points to debate, they're just about 'worrying for our nation'?

I can't even make sense of some of the comments like how they're the 'ends justify the means' crew. What ends and what means? That's help when making the attack.

Expanding the national debt even further to satisfy liberal constituencies on unproven, ill thought out policies without public scrutiny and discussion is anything but right. I'm personally happy to see some changes in the foreign policy arena but Obama's budget and economic policies will doom this nation.

What I meant to say is:

Some conservatives in the GWB presidency believed what they did was right, and the end justify the means (doing anything to deceit the public to build support for the Iraq war, for instance)

Liberals in power do the same thing: You believe that UHC is the way to go, so your reps try to push it through without public input/consultation. You think the government can fix anything so your president increases funding for most departments, even though the problem lies in inefficiency of government agencies. Your "stimulus package" involves mostly long term spending and not much short term relieve to the economy, which could be debated by itself (if the economy can really be "propped up") but your president still lied to the public about America being screwed if we don't pass his "stimulus package".

What happened to being truthful to the American people when your messiah's budget is based on unrealistic numbers on economic growth (basically lying to people who had hopium)? To push forward an agenda when we have record deficit and debt while foreigners will less likely buy our debt? Even some democrats are starting to question Obama's competency.

Lay off on the hopium and give the Obama administration the scrutiny it deserves, instead of just taking anything his administration says as truth.

On UHC: push it through without public input/consultation??? Damn it you made me use the JediYoda three punctuation marks. First, he *isn't even pushing UHC* - unfortunately. Second, what he is pushing - not only did Democrats begin pushing for UHC with *President Truman* - is that long enough for some public input - but it's not as if Obama and Democrats didn't run the whole campaign period this election on the plan, and have all kinds of chance for input. That's an irresponsible whine.

You substitute cute words like Hopium for any substance, any judgement, any accuracy.

Same with your BS about the bailout - the attacks you make are nothing less than dishonest. It's like the lefties who said Bush invaded Iraq because he loves killing.

The targets of the bailout can hardly be generalized as 'liberal constituencies' - not that there's anything wrong with a lot of those constituencies getting there fair share.

Your partisan illogic is the sort that says 'Democrats ended segregation to pander to a liberal constituency (blacks)'. Correlation is not causation. Maybe it was for better reason?

The bailouts are mostly going to the huge financial institutions who have largely donated Republican (and got the deregulation they wanted) - and the stimulus from Democrats is going to perfectly good causes like infrastructure, some of them 'liberal groups', which should be no surprise since a majority of the country is liberal as defined by party registration or having elected Obama. Your illogic would say any help for labor can't be because most Americans are in labor, it has to be for partisan reasons.

There is no comparison between the 'ends justify the means' behavior of the Bush administration *on war*, and the Democrats in power now. None.

If Obama is using unreasonable numbers for his estimates, prove the case, and I'll agree under the category of criticizing every president for that, but note that Obama has done more for honesty and transparency on the numbers already than any president in a long time, and deserves credit for that even if there are flaws.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
We have doubled the amount of Federal money spent on eduction and yet the results seem to be the same.

The typical unsupported PJ assertion.
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
Originally posted by: spidey07
What are you talking about? He campaigned on destroying the country fast and that's exactly what he is doing. No surprise here. He's doing exactly what he said he would do and you fools voted for him.

I'd do it again too. happily and proudly :thumbsup:

As for destroying the country... no, he see's the big picture and is doing what needs to be done during a time of crisis. You just watch and wait. A few years from now we will be looking back on all you right wing nutjobs and laughing at your misguided complaints.
 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
How is UHC is a bigger picture? We never needed UHC system in the past 200+ years of this country's history and we certainly don't need it now. Same for free health care for all children, we never needed it in the past and now we call it a necessity? I don't give a shit about political correctness so I am just speaking from my heart. So flame me or call me evil if you want to.
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
Originally posted by: Xellos2099
How is UHC is a bigger picture? We never needed UHC system in the past 200+ years

I wont flame away on you but... Its not "the bigger picture" its just a small part of it. As for never needing it, tell that to the sick that aren't able to get descent healthcare. I am not wholeheartetedly for it... but after watching whats been going on with the healthcare and prescription drug industry over the past decade, being taken over by corporations, bilking us dry - I am now for it.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,198
126
Originally posted by: Xellos2099
How is UHC is a bigger picture? We never needed UHC system in the past 200+ years of this country's history and we certainly don't need it now. Same for free health care for all children, we never needed it in the past and now we call it a necessity? I don't give a shit about political correctness so I am just speaking from my heart. So flame me or call me evil if you want to.

That's your opinion. The problem for you is that those who share it have lost the election.
 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
The world is never a fair place. The problem with the rising of the health care cost begin when medical insurance surface. Before there were medical insurance, even average joe can afford doctor visit, however, this change when medical insurance as doctors and hospital start giving the most expensive service and most expensive medication as they know it is going to be covered by the insurance. This in term cause the rise in medical insurance cost and now normal people can't afford it.

A big picture you say, two of the biggest agenda Obama have are green energy and UHC. As for green energy, ti sound good on paper, but it will never be as effective as nuclear energy. People are still complaining about the Three mile island incident, but that was a man made accident and technology have improve over the years. Less dependent on foreign oil he claim, why not drill on our own. The left claim it pollute the environment, but every country including Cuba and China are literally drill oil right in front of us. The sea is going to be polluted just the same even us benefiting. So why ntoi start drilling ourself and try to keep the damage to the mininial. Alos, he of his slogan during the elevation was that even if we drill, we won;t see a drop of oil in years, so why noy start now and when the oil price start rising again we will have a supply of our own oil.
 

shadow9d9

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
8,132
2
0
Originally posted by: Xellos2099
How is UHC is a bigger picture? We never needed UHC system in the past 200+ years of this country's history and we certainly don't need it now. Same for free health care for all children, we never needed it in the past and now we call it a necessity? I don't give a shit about political correctness so I am just speaking from my heart. So flame me or call me evil if you want to.

Tell that to the 1000s that have died due to lack of coverage because of "pre-existing conditions".
 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
That's the problem with the insurance policy. Tell that to the millions who will pay extra in taxes that do not need it. And do not expect UHC to fix everything.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Let's look at education for a second...

Figures from the 2009 budget:
In 2000 the budget for the Department of Education was $33 billion.

In 2008 the budget for the Department of Education was $66 billion.

We have doubled the amount of Federal money spent on eduction and yet the results seem to be the same.

Why should we throw even MORE money at this problem when the past clearly shows that more money does not provide us with better results.

One quote "No child left behind" was and is a failure. For the last 3 years of the Bush administration, folks even from his own party said the policy needed to be changed but he put forth no changes. The mess that we see now is because of change. I guarantee to you, all the wall street stuff would have been swept under the rug if McCain had been elected. The details we have been able to get about what has really been going down in the last 8 years is flatout because Obama has brought transparency. We can only hope that they can fix it. Some of this financial stuff you can't even blame Bush for. One thing Obama has said that is spot on, unfortunately for us this has been the culture for Wall Street. That is what we need to change. He even said on Leno which I thought was very sobering, that all this stuff these companies have done has been legal. That is disturbing, troubling, and scary all at the same time. I believe he can start us down the right road, but its going to take some time.
 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
Originally posted by: classy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Let's look at education for a second...

Figures from the 2009 budget:
In 2000 the budget for the Department of Education was $33 billion.

In 2008 the budget for the Department of Education was $66 billion.

We have doubled the amount of Federal money spent on eduction and yet the results seem to be the same.

Why should we throw even MORE money at this problem when the past clearly shows that more money does not provide us with better results.

One quote "No child left behind" was and is a failure. For the last 3 years of the Bush administration, folks even from his own party said the policy needed to be changed but he put forth no changes. The mess that we see now is because of change. I guarantee to you, all the wall street stuff would have been swept under the rug if McCain had been elected. The details we have been able to get about what has really been going down in the last 8 years is flatout because Obama has brought transparency. We can only hope that they can fix it. Some of this financial stuff you can't even blame Bush for. One thing Obama has said that is spot on, unfortunately for us this has been the culture for Wall Street. That is what we need to change. He even said on Leno which I thought was very sobering, that all this stuff these companies have done has been legal. That is disturbing, troubling, and scary all at the same time. I believe he can start us down the right road, but its going to take some time.

No child left behind was a bad approach to in the first place. Now days the high school students are basically preparing for the standardize test instead of the stuff they should be learning or preparing. Same with the teacher, instead od teaching them material for the future, they are teaching students on how to prepare for the standardize text. That is not the improvement we need to see. Scrap all public school and let government hand out tuition voucher for private school and I assure you the overall improvement will be bigger however, the teacher union will never allow it.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,233
55,779
136
Originally posted by: Xellos2099
How is UHC is a bigger picture? We never needed UHC system in the past 200+ years of this country's history and we certainly don't need it now. Same for free health care for all children, we never needed it in the past and now we call it a necessity? I don't give a shit about political correctness so I am just speaking from my heart. So flame me or call me evil if you want to.

What do you mean 'never needed it in the past'? We don't NEED lots of things, but it doesn't mean they aren't good ideas. We don't NEED effective sewage systems for our cities, we got by fine for years without them (and plenty of cities do today). Then again, having it is probably a good idea.

We already have free health care for everyone, we just have the least efficient form of it imaginable. Any sane person should want to change this, and we have a model of what works in other countries to build off.
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
Originally posted by: Xellos2099
The world is never a fair place. The problem with the rising of the health care cost begin when medical insurance surface. Before there were medical insurance, even average joe can afford doctor visit, however, this change when medical insurance as doctors and hospital start giving the most expensive service and most expensive medication as they know it is going to be covered by the insurance. This in term cause the rise in medical insurance cost and now normal people can't afford it.

A big picture you say, two of the biggest agenda Obama have are green energy and UHC. As for green energy, ti sound good on paper, but it will never be as effective as nuclear energy. People are still complaining about the Three mile island incident, but that was a man made accident and technology have improve over the years. Less dependent on foreign oil he claim, why not drill on our own. The left claim it pollute the environment, but every country including Cuba and China are literally drill oil right in front of us. The sea is going to be polluted just the same even us benefiting. So why ntoi start drilling ourself and try to keep the damage to the mininial. Alos, he of his slogan during the elevation was that even if we drill, we won;t see a drop of oil in years, so why noy start now and when the oil price start rising again we will have a supply of our own oil.

I see your point on healthcare and insurance... But the fact of the matter is, it happened, and its out of control. Right now, its under control of corporations, both drug companies and insurance companies. Like it or not, They are in control and pulling the strings (heavily). the situation sucks - but we are in it, like it or not. At this point, UHC is a better answer, if done right... because privatised, coupled with 50+ years of govt. payoff/corruption has left us totally broken.

As far as Oil, I disagree. There isn't enough oil to last forever, not likely even another 50 years, and it pollutes. We, as a country can move mountains when we have to. When we don't have to, we are lazy. Right now, Oil is easy, and we are lazy. We need to make a major push into nextgen green energy. The ones that exist right now, arent viable enough. We need a major breakthrough to happen to make the next gen energy an economically and environmentally viable solution. using Oil as a bandaid will only do one thing... Give us another false sense of oil security, and sell more trucks and SUV's.... 10 years later when oil starts getting scarce again, and we have another million Hummer h4's on the road gobbling up the gas, it will spike again and we will be exactly where we are today, having learned nothing and progressed zero. The push to green energy needs to happen now- drilling will only prolong the pain.

 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
Oil might not last forever, but will last long enough for us to figure something out. Until we can build electric car that run as good or fast and cheap as gas car and airplane that can run entirely on electric, we will need oil. Then tell me why all the fight against nuclear if green energy is good? As I recall correctly, it is the left who are against the nuclear energy the most. France is using it, China is using it and so how come we haven;t build a single power plant in decades? Building a nuclear near CA would surely cheapen their energy cost as they won;t need to buy expensive energy from Canada.

In addition, if there is really enough oil that will last 50 years, then all the auto industry will try to think of creating car that would meet the need else they won;t be selling jack shit when oil run dry. We shouldn't need to pump billions of dollar into them to force to them to created hybrid. If there is a demand, then the market will made it. That's how it always go.
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
Originally posted by: Xellos2099
Oil might not last forever, but will last long enough for us to figure something out. Until we can build electric car that run as good or fast and cheap as gas car and airplane that can run entirely on electric, we will need oil. Then tell me why all the fight against nuclear if green energy is good? As I recall correctly, it is the left who are against the nuclear energy the most. France is using it, China is using it and so how come we haven;t build a single power plant in decades? Building a nuclear near CA would surely cheapen their energy cost as they won;t need to buy expensive energy from Canada.

agreed, it would be nice if we could drill, get some cheap oil to hold us over until the next gen stuff is viable... The problem is it doesnt work that way. We drill, oil gets cheap, and people start buying hummers and SUV to commute to work in. We go back to our false sense of security and the next gen stuff gets put on the back burner - as a society we cant accomplish moving over to green unless it becomes urgent.

I agree with you on nuclear - we should be using it more. There is the issue of waste though.
 

Xellos2099

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2005
2,277
13
81
Hammer suck, period, it is for people who like to show off to see who have a bigger gun/car.. As for SUV, there IS a reason why these things sell, they rock, huge storage area and they can hold a hell lot more people then sedan. Maybe car company should made SUV that run on electric battery. Speaking of battery, people are still trying to figure out how to take car of those electric car battery as it is quite poisonous as well. As for oil, we got plenty of oil in the slane srea of the country and there is a process that would allow us to turn coal into gas and we got plenty of coal in this country.