Obama

[innerSpaceman]

On the other hand, JW, I don't doubt that many Bush protestors were against him personally.


Before he even became president, his policies as Governor of Texas were enough to make me hate his guts As A Person.


So turnabout seems fair play. Even though many of the protestors used talking points from conservative websites bankrolled by the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries, that's fair play in America, too. If they were motivated by fear, and not by payola, that's fair play protesting in America.


It may be asinine, but it's fair play.

[scaeagles]

Don't tell me that it wasn't personal with Bush, JW. I thought it was particularly amusing when the left was saying how the portrayal of Obama as Heath Ledger's Joker was "mean spirited and dangerous", yet the same thing was done in portrayals of Bush.

And ISM, while I appreciate you sharing that sentiment, don't pretend many protesters on the left don't just take their talking points from liberal websites.

As far as who the pharmaceutical companies might be with....have you read this? Obama's been secretly dealing with them behind the scenes.

[innerSpaceman]

Could be. I'm sure I have a bias, and no offense meant to anyone here, but in my experience liberals and progressives tend to be better educated than conservatives and regressives - and thus often put talking points into their own words through a digested thought process rather than parroting them brainlessly.


Completely anecdotal.

[BarTopDancer]

Stephen Hawking likes his "Death Panel" Health Care.

Turns out that the world's best-known and most health-challenged physicist thinks that his single-payer health care system works just fine.

"I wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for the NHS. I have received a large amount of high quality treatment without which I would not have survived." ---Stephen Hawking, August 11, 2009

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Could be. I'm sure I have a bias, and no offense meant to anyone here, but in my experience liberals and progressives tend to be better educated than conservatives and regressives - and thus often put talking points into their own words through a digested thought process rather than parroting them brainlessly.


Completely anecdotal.

I will say without hesitation that a large influence on the modern conservative culture has been anti-education and anti-intellectual sentiments. Demonstrated rather sublimely by this lament from Intelligent Design advocate, Rev. Ray Mummert, "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." Intellectualism and education have been rebranded as "elitism", expertise as "agenda".

[Alex]

Yes, a large segment of the opposition to every president in my life (except for maybe the first Bush) has been extremely personal. It just swings back and forth.

And yes there is a machine behind the punditry of both sides. And the Democratic machine can be (or at least tries to be, in some areas the Republican machine is much better at maintaining message focus) just as stupid and deceptive as the Republican machine.

And yes, a lot of people believe a lot of stupid things. Just so we're clear that Ann Coulter saying that just means she's acknowledging that the birther movement is a stupid thing. And while it is all and well good to lay the initial birth certificate question as the feet of a Democrat is remains the case that at this point in time it is a right wing issue.

And yes, plenty of people on both sides find it to be the pinnacle of rhetoric to compare the hated opposition to Hitler or to simultaneously accuse the other side of fascist socialism or fascist free marketeers (as if both of those weren't oxymoronic).

And yes, even here these tendencies towards infantility make appearances.

And yes, it is just as moronic to say that the protesters are Nazis as it is for those those protesters to be equating anything Obama has suggested with Nazi-ism (though one of those bits of moronity are being put forward depending on whether your sign has a swastika or a swastika with a line through it).

And yes, it is just as stupid to say that Obama wants to kill old people as it is for the left to say that Republicans want to kill poor people.

So, if we can acknowledge that there's plenty of stupid to go around, how about we try to raise the bar a bit?

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

On the other hand, JW, I don't doubt that many Bush protestors were against him personally.


Before he even became president, his policies as Governor of Texas were enough to make me hate his guts As A Person.


So turnabout seems fair play. Even though many of the protestors used talking points from conservative websites bankrolled by the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries, that's fair play in America, too. If they were motivated by fear, and not by payola, that's fair play protesting in America.


It may be asinine, but it's fair play.

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Don't tell me that it wasn't personal with Bush, JW. I thought it was particularly amusing when the left was saying how the portrayal of Obama as Heath Ledger's Joker was "mean spirited and dangerous", yet the same thing was done in portrayals of Bush.

And ISM, while I appreciate you sharing that sentiment, don't pretend many protesters on the left don't just take their talking points from liberal websites.

As far as who the pharmaceutical companies might be with....have you read this? Obama's been secretly dealing with them behind the scenes.

I never said there wasn't bias against Bush, the man. I was just responding to the claim that the health care protesters had no bias against Obama himself.

[scaeagles]

I think the bar here is a whole ot higher than the bar...well....pretty much everywhere else on the internet.

We all have our passions and political leanings (except perhaps you, Alex) that make us feel better about the stupidity that goes on on our own particular sides of the aisle than the other, and make it easier to point out the stupidity on the other side. If we agree in sentiment it is easier to empathize with the stupid person than it is if we don't.

Back to "raising the bar" a bit....I can read certain portions of the 1018 page house health care bill and see where certain deductions can be made even if I didn't come to the same conclusion, and granted a lot of it is spin. I've come across a list of some 100 points about the bill and outrageous claims made, and some I can read that way and others I don't. Some I agree with. I think the major problem is that much of it is open to broad interpretation and some of it could lead to blatant abuse by the government.

Some fear insurance companies and drug companies. I fear the government more.

[flippyshark]

The drug and insurance companies are the devil I currently know and despise. I have no idea if a public option would be better, but I am personally, and literally, desperate for a change. I'm one of those slip-through-the-cracks cases - I work three or four part time jobs, have no coverage, and as of a couple of months ago, could no longer afford to carry myself. There is no question in my mind that the current system doesn't give a shyte if I cack it tomorrow (Am I really just supposed to just keep checking into the Emergency Room?- Am I really supposed to just shrug and accept that these are the breaks, and I deserve this for the poor choices I made earlier in life? Swell)

I'm SO ready for something different. My contributions to this topic would not be informed by impartiality and reason. I confess that I am worried and panicky. And not very hopeful either way the ball rolls. Those who support the status quo are welcome to try to talk me down.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Some fear insurance companies and drug companies. I fear the government more.

There, in a nutshell, is the core of the disagreement between the two sides.