|
|
Post by impulse on Dec 7, 2018 15:17:18 GMT -5
Pulling out of the Iran deal. Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's. Getting people engaged in politics instead of usual apathy. The first one potentially destabilizes a volatile region, so I'm not crazy about that though the original deal was from from perfect. The second really stirs stuff up over there and seems like a stunt more than anything pandering the religious right without actually improving anything. The third I agree is a good thing, though it is FAR from flattering of Trump. He's so appalling that he's fired up everyone to stop his, at best blundering and at worst flat-out evil wave of damage. I oppose the man on so many levels, but I'd still like to believe America is going to be okay, and I'm honestly scared that isn't the case. I'd love to know I'm wrong and be able to sleep at night, knowing that I'm ignorant but everything is okay. It's much nicer than being smart and everything being scary.I wanted to believe he knew what he was doing with North Korea. I suppose he may still come out vindicated on that one, but it isn't looking too good. Sadly, you're not wrong. There is a baseline level of existential anxiety now that I try to stay up on world events. And not likely, It looks more and more like he got played like a fiddle with reports of NK lying and having other secret nuke test sites. Not that anyone should be surprised NK lied. I admit I was cautiously optimistic when I first heard he might have gotten NK to agree to ceasing the nuclear stuff, but alas, it was to good to be true. And as a conservative I am happy to see a less liberal direction in our policies. But that would be negative for the rest of you. I think it is good to have some different ideas to serve as a balance rather than the same direction all the time This strikes me as odd because US politics are SUPER conservative compared to the rest of the civilized world. The "left" party is really center, and the "right" party is righter than a 90 degree angle. Ugh. I did what I didn't want to do. Talk about the current president It's hard not to. A valiant effort to hold out as long as you did. This is a start. I will respectfully ask the following questions: 1. How much influence, in your estimation, does any POTUS have on the economy? 2. Follow-up: how quickly do you think a POTUS, if he does have influence on the economy, can turn things around? Obama spent most of his presidency undoing the damage from Bush II, which accounts, in part, for the less-than-robust results under him, but are we to believe Obama's actions had nothing to do with the recovery and that it is all because of POTUS Donald J. Trump? The economy is like the Titanic, slow to change course but quick to sink. 3. Who is benefiting from the growth? Young people are still having difficulty finding jobs that pay enough to cover their student loan debt, even with the low unemployment figures, and real wages have been stagnant for years. Is this a case where the rich are getting richer and the masses are falling further behind? Mind you, I'm a fiscal conservative, and up until this year, had voted Republican predominantly for the better part of the past three decades. I'm just disgusted by what the Republican Party has become, especially under POTUS Donald J. Trump, tacking harder to the right and more strongly embracing Randian philosophic tenets instead of making sure that everyone gets taken care of. This only looks good for Trump if you put on blinders and ignore context. As you said, Obama inherited a clusterf*** of a mess from the previous admin, and whether or not we agree the president has much influence over the economy or unemployment, you cannot take these as isolated points. You must look at the trend, and starting in 2010 there has been a steady increase from disaster to prosperity. At best, Trump did not ruin the upward trend through incompetence and allowed it to continue, with some spikes with business speculating on more profits as he slashed regulations. You could argue Trump is responsible for that, though in my opinion removing policies to keep our planet less polluted and cement the continued existence of the human race in the name of profits for the top 1% is not a good thing. For one the ACA. It really didn't impact me but I have seen the negative effects in my job and how it affected some friends who are small business owners. It needs fixed. The ACA was not liberal, though. It was a conservative plan and worked quite well as Romneycare where it wasn't being crippled and hamstrung by Republicans for political points. And while it has not impacted you, it was literally life-saving for many people. A close friend's wife might not live to grow old if not for pre-existing conditions protections. Also, question that may be a conservative paradox - there is good data out there suggesting a true single-payer system, a la medicare for all, would actually save US Citizens literally billions if not trillions of dollars in the long run. This would be in the form of somewhat higher taxes and greatly reduced premiums. This expands a governmental agency but saves the US a TON of money, and the money saved from premiums and cost of care could be spent in other areas of the economy. There's also the added benefit of 95% of citizens would not risk bankruptcy and financial ruination if they have the poor fortune to get sick., Food for thought. I said fixed. Sorry hal but I can see the good and the bad on both sides. It would be better to fix it than to repeal it. Better yet had it not been gutted and ruined as stunt to make dems look bad. Best of all to replace it with medicare-for-all and save us all boatloads of money. |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Dec 7, 2018 15:18:40 GMT -5
So what you are saying is the democrats stole an idea from the Republicans and screwed it up😁 LOL, they stole the idea from Republicans to try and get bipartisan approval, but Republicans ruined it rather than let Democrats get a "win." |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 7, 2018 15:20:09 GMT -5
So what you are saying is the democrats stole an idea from the Republicans and screwed it up😁 No, quite the opposite. An idea birthed by conservatives was then disowned and severely injured by the conservatives. |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 7, 2018 15:21:55 GMT -5
As opposed to being repealed, gutted and ambushed? It was the Republicans who fought it tooth and nail and made it more unwieldy. Ironic because it began life in its original form courtesy the Heritage Foundation. And, cue the irony once again, it's working very well in Massachusetts, where it was originally called -- a final dollop of irony -- Romney care. I also wonder if whatever gains conservatives have made are worth the deal with the devil they've made. Further irony for evangelicals...wasn't the Antichrist supposed to be charismatic, appealing and seductive as a leader? I said fixed. Sorry hal but I can see the good and the bad on both sides. Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you believed that it should be repealed. But nothing that the conservatives have done has improved a plan that most Americans support. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2018 16:06:25 GMT -5
Geez. Give a guy some space. I am now on vacation so I am signing off for a few days
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 7, 2018 16:23:04 GMT -5
Pulling out of the Iran deal. Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's. Getting people engaged in politics instead of usual apathy. Pulling out of the Iran deal was absolutely bonkers, even if you agree with the GOP version of how bad it was. We gave them their money back and put an agreement in place that scraps Iran's nuclear-weapons program, with inspection procedures in place to make sure they are keeping their part of the bargain. So what does pulling out of it mean? Iran already got their money. So President Trump - supposedly a master at bargaining - shows that he's just the opposite! But it makes him look tough to people who like talking tough. Also, it gave the GOP another chance to repeat the talking points about how bad Obama's deal supposedly was. That's always important. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Dec 7, 2018 16:44:04 GMT -5
Pulling out of the Iran deal. Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's. Getting people engaged in politics instead of usual apathy. Pulling out of the Iran was absolutely bonkers, even if you agree with the GOP version of how bad it was. We gave them their money back and put an agreement in place that scraps Iran's nuclear-weapons program, with inspection procedures in place to make sure they are keeping their part of the bargain. So what does pulling out of it mean? Iran already got their money. So President Trump - supposedly a master at bargaining - shows that he's just the opposite! But it makes him look tough to people who like talking tough. Also, it gave the GOP another chance to repeat the talking points about how bad Obama's deal supposedly was. That's always important. I remember how Obama presented the plan, back in the day. He explained that Iran's efforts to develop nuclear weapons would be pushed back a good decade, during which many things might happen -including a normalization of international relations that would render the point moot. If things didn't work out, ten years from then we wouldn't be in a worse situation than at the present. We'd be facing the exact same problem, but after a ten-years reprieve. That was reasonable, I thought. It allowed room for optimism, but it was also realistic. Nobody thought Iran was giving up nukes forever and ever just because of a signature; the deal was a time-gaining measure that satisfied all parties involved and was therefore more likely to be honoured. Scrapping the accord means that Iran now has little incentive not to resume developing its nuclear weapons, and it could be argued that the country could see it as a paramount necessity. Since President Trump seems to have great respect for Kin Jong Un, perhaps it would be wise for any country standing up to the U.S. to get nukes too. Diplomacy apparently doesn't work. Hopefully the EU and Russia will be able to persuade the country not to go down that way (because I really, really don't like the idea of a nuclear Iran). |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 7, 2018 16:50:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 7, 2018 16:56:23 GMT -5
Bring on Claude Rains again. |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 7, 2018 16:59:04 GMT -5
Electing Trump to get people engaged in politics is like poking out your eyes so that you'll appreciate a sunset.
|
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Dec 7, 2018 18:16:36 GMT -5
and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. (Revelations 13:5) Hmm, forty-two months eh? I guess we'll have to wait and see. I remember before even the first attack on the WTC a psychic on a tv show, i think on TLC, mentioning flames erupting from the WTC towers and I thought after the first attack that was absolutely wild how close the predication was. After the 2001 horror I have remained in wait for another predication of hers to occur... Mount Rainer blowing.  I will chime in about how I have noticed Michael Moore/U.S. media saying things about Canadian health care I know to be very untrue to fairly untrue. We are increasingly rationed, people do die on wait lists, for specialist appointments and for tests using expensive in demand equipment, and now often you can only ask one medical situation be addressed per doctor appointment now. Also we do pay, it's not free, and in British Columbia until recently you might pay a monthly fee. Also dental and eye are all outside the system and you would need extended coverage privately, and more conditions, procedures and drugs are being de-listed than added. I have direct experience with both Canadian and U.S. healthcare (private coverage and then Medicaid after that) in the very worst circumstances. I can't say anything about Cuban medical care and don't think Michael Moore should have either unless he wanted to go and live there. Maybe it's great but enjoy keeping a 1950s car on the road (talk about health hazzard even without the very common asbestos brake pad refits common there) and a near starvation diet at times. As ever, in the middle, but trying to tolerate the extremists and true believers on all sides.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 7, 2018 18:34:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 7, 2018 18:36:19 GMT -5
Nobody thought Iran was giving up nukes forever and ever just because of a signature; the deal was a time-gaining measure that satisfied all parties involved and was therefore more likely to be honoured.
I think Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, unveiled a cache of documents that, he claimed, showed how Iran was already cheating on the agreement with a secret Iranian nuclear weapons programme.
Should Benji's intelligence be dismissed and discarded from all consideration?
Most of what he unveiled in his "big reveal" was previously known, as it related to Project Amad, an Iranian nuclear program -- not specifically a weapons program -- that had ended in the early 2000s. Turns out that Iran had been -- brace yourself -- lying about what it had been doing back then. As everybody and her brother knew all along. Everybody also always has understood that the deal was not based on trusting Iran, but on inspections. Quick quiz: who told the Seante, in April of 2018, ”I’ve read [the Iran deal] now three times ... and I will say that it is written almost with an assumption that Iran would try to cheat, so the verification ... is actually pretty robust as far as our intrusive ability to get in.” (A) Bill Ayers (B) Obama (C) John Kerry (D) "Mad Dog" Mattis Of course, it's (D), the man who works for the pathological liar in the White House. Bebe gave no information that said or implied that Iran was in violation of the treaty it signed with President Obama. This was a PR stunt aimed at impressing Trump; if you'll recall, it was all big letters and pictures (No, really!), just the way Netanyahu had been told Trump likes his briefings. (It's like a Golden Book for grown-ups.) Think it worked? :format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10752777/GettyImages_953158856.jpg) |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 7, 2018 19:02:17 GMT -5
I think Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, unveiled a cache of documents that, he claimed, showed how Iran was already cheating on the agreement with a secret Iranian nuclear weapons programme.
Should Benji's intelligence be dismissed and discarded from all consideration?
Most of what he unveiled in his "big reveal" was previously known, as it related to Project Amad, an Iranian nuclear program -- not specifically a weapons program -- that had ended in the early 2000s. Turns out that Iran had been -- brace yourself -- lying about what it had been doing back then. As everybody and her brother knew all along. Everybody also always has understood that the deal was not based on trusting Iran, but on inspections. Quick quiz: who told the Seante, in April of 2018, ”I’ve read [the Iran deal] now three times ... and I will say that it is written almost with an assumption that Iran would try to cheat, so the verification ... is actually pretty robust as far as our intrusive ability to get in.” (A) Bill Ayers (B) Obama (C) John Kerry (D) "Mad Dog" Mattis Of course, it's (D), the man who works for the pathological liar in the White House. Bebe gave no information that said or implied that Iran was in violation of the treaty it signed with President Obama. This was a PR stunt aimed at impressing Trump; if you'll recall, it was all big letters and pictures (No, really!), just the way Netanyahu had been told Trump likes his briefings. (It's like a Golden Book for grown-ups.) Think it worked? I couldn't remember the details, but I did remember that there are a lot of reasons not to trust Netanyahu on anything. He is a piece of work. That bit about the Palestinians giving Hitler the idea to exterminate the Jews ignores centuries of European anti-Semitism … as if those cuddly friendly Germans could never come up with anything like that on their own. It had to be Muslims! It's childish nonsense that should make anybody pause before quoting Netanyahu on pretty much anything, especially relating to his Muslim neighbors. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Dec 7, 2018 19:51:42 GMT -5
and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. (Revelations 13:5) Hmm, forty-two months eh? I guess we'll have to wait and see. I remember before even the first attack on the WTC a psychic on a tv show, i think on TLC, mentioning flames erupting from the WTC towers and I thought after the first attack that was absolutely wild how close the predication was. After the 2001 horror I have remained in wait for another predication of hers to occur... Mount Rainer blowing. I will chime in about how I have noticed Michael Moore/U.S. media saying things about Canadian health care I know to be very untrue to fairly untrue. We are increasingly rationed, people do die on wait lists, for specialist appointments and for tests using expensive in demand equipment, and now often you can only ask one medical situation be addressed per doctor appointment now. Also we do pay, it's not free, and in British Columbia until recently you might pay a monthly fee. Also dental and eye are all outside the system and you would need extended coverage privately, and more conditions, procedures and drugs are being de-listed than added.I have direct experience with both Canadian and U.S. healthcare (private coverage and then Medicaid after that) in the very worst circumstances. I can't say anything about Cuban medical care and don't think Michael Moore should have either unless he wanted to go and live there. Maybe it's great but enjoy keeping a 1950s car on the road (talk about health hazzard even without the very common asbestos brake pad refits common there) and a near starvation diet at times. As ever, in the middle, but trying to tolerate the extremists and true believers on all sides. That is an outrage!!! In Quebec we pay nothing at all. People in BC should protest and not let the government get away with it! In the last two years my mother underwent cancer surgery, then chemotherapy, then paliative care in a wonderful pavillion until her death. At the same time, I got three surgeries after a bicycle accident that required a lot of metal pieces being inserted and removed. We did not pay one penny (except the parking at the hospital). There was no waiting list because in each case it was an emergency. That’s how things should be! (Perhaps our prime minister should hear of it... he could then deflect any criticism by saying “well, it’s worse on the other side of the country!”) |
|
