Obama '08?

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The health-care reform bill is currently polling at higher levels of approval than any previous time; so your correspondent is a little incorrect to call it 'wildly unpopular.'

Not only that, but the decision to drop health plans - in order to maximize profits - is a grossly irresponsible corporate decision, and not one that can be laid at the feet of Obama or the government. It is entirely an internal decision on the part of greedy executives in these companies.

Cycloptichorn

Total baloney, and stupidity as well.

I will say it again, if Obamacare screws up my very excellent health insurance that I have worked all my life to have and to maintain, I am going to be very mad about it.

1 Reply

@okie,

Another comment, I think Obama wants to destroy private insurance, he wants companies to drop their insurance, because his end game is single payer government run health care. I don't think this is any secret to anyone that has followed Obama's words and actions.

1 Reply

New poll shows Obama approval at all-time low

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_pl2821

Quote:

Sixty-two percent of respondents believe the country is on the wrong track — the highest number recorded since just before Election Day in 2008 — and just one-third believe things are going to get better, a 7-point drop since a month ago and the lowest such number in the Obama presidency.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Another comment, I think Obama wants to destroy private insurance, he wants companies to drop their insurance, because his end game is single payer government run health care. I don't think this is any secret to anyone that has followed Obama's words and actions.

I wish he would! What would the downside of this be?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

RELEVANT FACTS
=========================================================
Robert S. Lichter, Professor at Smith College, and Stanlty Rothman, Professor at George Washington University, after an extensive study, in The Radical Personality: Social Psychology Components of New Left Ideology, 1982:
Most liberals exhibit a narcissistic pathology marked by grandiosity, envy, a lack of empathy, illusions of personal perfection, and a sense of entitlement.
=========================================================
The mentor of those who mentored Barack Obama when he was a Chicago community organizer was Saul Alinsky, who in his books, Reveille for Radicals, and Rules for Radicals wrote:

Radicals should be "political relativists." and should take an agnostic view of means and ends;
The most basic principle for radicals is lie to opponents and disarm them by pretending to be moderates and liberals;
The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth—truth to him is relative and changing;
Radicals are not virtuous by not wanting power, because power is good and powerlessness is evil;
Life is a corrupting process;
He who fears corruption fears life;
The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;
The radical is building his own kingdom;
The radical’s purpose is to undermine the system by taking from the haves and giving it to the have-nots;
The stated cause is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause;
The real cause is accumulation of power to make the revolution;
The standard of the revolution is a democracy which upends all social hierarchies, including those based on merit.
=========================================================
The Alinsky devoted, if ultimately allowed to be successful, will destroy the rest of the human race as well as themselves.
=========================================================

5 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

okie wrote:

Another comment, I think Obama wants to destroy private insurance, he wants companies to drop their insurance, because his end game is single payer government run health care. I don't think this is any secret to anyone that has followed Obama's words and actions.

I wish he would! What would the downside of this be?

Cycloptichorn

If you don't know the answer, then you are one sad pathetic individual, that has no understanding of freedom and liberty, or the constitution that guarantees it.

2 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

okie wrote:

Another comment, I think Obama wants to destroy private insurance, he wants companies to drop their insurance, because his end game is single payer government run health care. I don't think this is any secret to anyone that has followed Obama's words and actions.

I wish he would! What would the downside of this be?

Cycloptichorn

If you don't know the answer, then you are one sad pathetic individual, that has no understanding of freedom and liberty, or the constitution that guarantees it.

Translation: you don't know what the downside would be. But by gum, you're against it!

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

cyclops, what would be the downside of driving every real estate company out of business? From now on, you must purchase your home or rent your home from the government. The government now owns all real estate in this country. Do you have any clue to what the downside of that scenario would be? I do, and if you don't, I don't feel like wasting my time trying to explain it to you. Hows that for an answer? The same answer applies to health care.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

cyclops, what would be the downside of driving every real estate company out of business? From now on, you must purchase your home or rent your home from the government. The government now owns all real estate in this country. Do you have any clue to what the downside of that scenario would be? I do, and if you don't, I don't feel like wasting my time trying to explain it to you. Hows that for an answer? The same answer applies to health care.

Do you honestly believe that insurance is the equivalent of property? Your analogy is flawed in several ways, Okie.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I think it is a decent analogy, not perfect, but very useful. After all, what is more important than our homes we live in? Is it more important than our health care, maybe not, but it would rank right up there in terms of importance. Whether it is more important or somewhat less important, the principle stands as extremely illustrative of the point I am making. In other words, if every American deserves decent health care, why not decent housing, and then why not decent diets, why not decent transportation, why not decent clothing, on and on. In fact, to each according to his need and to each according to his ability, sounds great doesn't it?

1 Reply

@okie,

even with out healthcare, there would still be lots of ways for the insurance industry to overcharge some and deny others coverage

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

okie wrote:

Another comment, I think Obama wants to destroy private insurance, he wants companies to drop their insurance, because his end game is single payer government run health care. I don't think this is any secret to anyone that has followed Obama's words and actions.

I wish he would! What would the downside of this be?

Cycloptichorn

1. The loss of personal freedom and privacy.
2. Infecting the delivery of medical services with all the efficiency and personal consideration for which government bureaucracies are so well known.
3. The creation of yet another cadre of unionized government employees more dedicated to the preservation of their own positions and perogatives than the services it is their duty to deliver, and insulated by the government from the market forces that would otherwise keep them honest. They will do for health care what teachers unions have done for public schools.
4. Massive new costs added to an already overburdened government budget, and the hastening of the financial collapse that is already affecting the nations of Europe.

1 Reply

Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman Liberty Counsel wrote:

What do you call it when a radical minority
forces its will on the law-abiding majority?
The Obama/Pelosi/Reid power axis would have
us call it "progressive leadership." The
Founders called it "tyranny." Read below -- Mat.

I am not surprised that socialist leaders Obama, Pelosi and Reid found a convoluted way to get their tyrannical healthcare "reform" bill through Congress. And there is no doubt that evidence of vote buying and extreme coercion, both legal and illegal, will surface for weeks to come.

But this is not the time to rehash the tragic
spectacle we saw unfold over the weekend. Now
is the time to TAKE ACTION to stop ObamaCare
and its anti-life, anti-family, and anti-economy
provisions IN A COURT OF LAW.

At every step of the way in ObamaCare's long march through Congress, the liberal Democrat leaders used trickery, overt manipulation, and out-and-out vote buying to thwart the American people's clearly expressed opposition to their socialist takeover of our medical system.

Now, with this hugely unpopular bill we are facing the brutal reality of what the 111th Congress has forced down our throats:

* Abortion coverage Americans don't want
* Exorbitant costs Americans don't want
* Mandatory participation Americans don't want
* New federal bureaucracies Americans don't want
* A vast expansion of IRS power Americans don't want

++Our Constitution is being subverted right before our eyes.

The "checks and balances" our Founders gave us are being systematically overpowered and dismantled by the Obama/Pelosi/Reid power axis. Never before has the will of the people been so completely ignored and marginalized.

ObamaCare is unconstitutional! If Congress has
the power to FORCE each person to have health
insurance, then individual liberty is totally
meaningless.

Because the bill mandates individual coverage and requires private employers to provide coverage, Liberty Counsel is FILING SUIT IN FEDERAL COURT THIS WEEK to challenge the bill's constitutionality!

Given the sad spectacle we saw play out in the House of Representatives, we must now win this battle in a courtroom.

++ ObamaCare was unlawful from the beginning.

There were MANY reasons why Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi allowed no one but their closest insiders - and the White House arm twisters, of course - to participate in developing and managing ObamaCare. For one thing, its "Tooth Fairy"
accounting can't stand up to even mild scrutiny.

But the biggest reason was that Congress had NO AUTHORITY to force its socialist healthcare agenda on citizens and businesses in the first place!

The bill that passed the House of Representatives is unconstitutional because:

1) Congress has NO authority to force every American
to carry insurance coverage, and,
2) Congress has NO authority to fine employers whose
policies do not have the mandated coverage.

No matter the desires of certain elected officials, there are some things Congress just cannot do! And the threat to our liberty posed by ObamaCare goes FAR beyond healthcare. If Congress can get away with this expansive power grab, then individual liberty and state sovereignty will soon vanish.

Nancy Pelosi said as much when she told reporters that after "kicking down the door" with ObamaCare, her Congress will push through the rest of their ultraliberal agenda.

EVERY version of the "healthcare reform" bill this Congress produced - even considering whatever "reconciliation" issues are eventually appended to the Senate version - is patently unconstitutional!

This monstrous, anti-life, anti-family healthcare bill MUST now be strongly challenged in the federal judiciary. With your help, Liberty Counsel is doing exactly that!

++The battle over ObamaCare has just begun.

Americans nationwide are expressing OUTRAGE at the overt manipulation and total lack of integrity that characterized the final vote on ObamaCare. Reid, Pelosi and Obama proved they were willing to do ANYTHING to get this government takeover of our medical system.

Now more than ever, the socialists and abortion advocates need to understand that WE HAVE NOT GIVEN UP and will resist implementation of ObamaCare to the very end. Now WE'LL SEE THEM IN COURT! And we have an excellent chance of winning our federal lawsuit.

Now is NOT the time to be silent! Join like-minded Americans who will be putting the plotters on notice that we filed a federal lawsuit to stop this power grab once and for all.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

Hey ican, don't forget the continuing saga of the Blagojevich pay to play scandal in Illinois, in regard to your impeachment hopes. This story is still percolating out there, and do not forget how corrupt Chicago and Illinois politics was, which produced Obama.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/2427402,CST-NWS-BLAGO24.article

"A top aide to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he believed Barack Obama knew of Blagojevich's plot to win himself a presidential Cabinet post in exchange for appointing Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate.

John Harris, Blagojevich's former chief of staff, testified Wednesday in the former governor's corruption trial that three days after the Nov. 4, 2008, presidential election, the ex-governor told Harris he felt confident Obama knew he wanted to swap perks.

The president understands that the governor would be willing to make the appointment of Valerie Jarrett as long as he gets what he's asked for. . . . The governor gets the Cabinet appointment he's asked for," Harris said, explaining a recorded call.

Harris said Blagojevich came away believing Obama knew what he wanted after having a conversation with a local union representative, who in turn spoke with labor leader Tom Balanoff, with whom Blagojevich met to discuss a Jarrett appointment. Jarrett, now a White House adviser, was seeking the appointment to Obama's Senate seat."

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

His name is not "Robert S. Lichter."

Whatever your real name is, would you want some idiot on a public forum to misspell or otherwise misrepresent it?

He is not a professor at Smith College and never was.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

You also seem confused about Dr. Rothman's first name which is not Stanlty,a series of letters unpronounceable in English. I emailed Dr. Rothman tonight as we have probably met.

Here is a note on the organization he has run for the 25 years he has not been at George Washington University:

The purpose of the Center for the Study of Social and Political Change at Smith College is to study current issues of social change and public policy and to communicate the findings to policy makers, intellectuals and the general public. One of the very few advanced social science research facilities at an undergraduate institution, the Center is currently engaged in studies of the influence of American elites, the crisis in the University and an analysis of the American political economy. The goal of the Center is to develop a better understanding of the past, present, and future of the American social and political experiment on the basis of certain hypotheses that the director, Stanley Rothman, has developed over the past 25 years which place that experiment in a particular historical and comparative perspective.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

I tried googling these lines and they are credited to you and this forum. In fact, they do not seem to exist outside of this forum.

BTW, I corrected you on this when you posted it previously, as you did on 19 February 2010 and 29 May 2010.

Why do you want to continually post material in which the names of the people you supposedly quote are as wrong as their supposed teaching affiliations?

You are making a fool of yourself.

And, this information seems to have originated with Ann Coulter, I think she should fire her research assistant and her publisher needs to fire her editor.

Both are grossly incompetent.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

Your badly cited and poorly researched post says:

Quote:

The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth—truth to him is relative and changing;

How is that any different from the beliefs of Leo Strauss, the man who inspired the neo-Conservative movement:

Quote:

Strauss noted that thinkers of the first rank, going back to Plato, had raised the problem of whether good politicians could be completely truthful and still achieve the necessary ends of their society

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

Much reference is made to Alinsky in conservative blogs but not in liberal ones. Hmmm.

0 Replies

@okie,

Wow! So, the alleged downside of single payer health care appears in the Constitution? Whodda think the FF were so prescient?! Please cite the relevant articles.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know