Happy Face 29 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 See I don't think Obama is a stooge, I think that despite his good intentions, America is so entangled in the pocket of big business that it would take decades for him to actually deliver the changes he's promised. I really believe that two terms of Obama and a cessation of sensational rhetoric from the extremists from both parties and you would begin to see a more progressive America. One unafraid of terms like Socialism and Change I agree it's not Obama's fault like, it's been set up like this for decades ever since corporations became humnan in the eyes of the law. Everyone's a stooge because everyone relies on corporate funding to get any power. What's disappointing is that he tells people it's any different and "yes we can" affect change. I don't buy that anyone can change that around in any number of terms. It needs the voters to move away from the two parties on the payroll. Sensational rhetoric is just cable news catnip. It has no effect whatsoever on what gets lobbied through the houses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Elite stooge or clever well meaning black man? Quick question Parky, why bring race into it? Think it's part of the smoke and mirrors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Elite stooge or clever well meaning black man? Quick question Parky, why bring race into it? It's been pivotal in stopping liberals criticising him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 I know what you're saying. It doesn't appear to be a shift in policy. However, I don't believe that Obama is simply a corporate stooge, his healthcare bill alone proves he's not afraid to affect the change he promised in his early rhetoric. I'm of the opinion Obama is hamstrung by entrenched corruption and doubledealing in Washington, but also that he's not above it himself. to quote West Wing. "But I'll tell you what sir, in a battle between a president's demons and his better angels, I think for the first time in a long while, we may just have ourselves a fair fight." His healthcare bill dropped tens of millions of new paying customers into the lap of the health insurance industry....they lobbied in favour of his changes.....omitting a public option. Very much a corporate stooge on that score. His rhetoric was of a public option, which he dropped once in power. He didn't affect the change he promised. No-one in washington is double dealing....they're all pulling in the same direction. Corporate ownership of state. The reform bill requires the industry to pay over $100 billion in cash to the government for funding. The impact of the additional insured population depends on the price they pay, which will be driven down by insurance exchanges. The cost to the population of any insurance will be high because healthcare is absurdly expensive in the US because of the huge remuneration to doctors. A jobbing oncologist earns half a million dollars a year. Paid for via fee for service reimbursement from public and private insurance. The return to the insurance industry in terms of profit is not clear, revenues will go up but their fear is this will not be enough to compensate for the increased costs of providing healthcare to people who are paying lower and lower premiums, who are the least healthiest and have the highest costs. The increased population with access to drugs will be offset for pharma from downward price pressure from the insurance companies on prices. Medicare and Medicaid will set price limits for drugs outside of the private market as they are squeezed by federal budget cost pressures. Tiered pricing schemes for newly insured patients will further reduce actual prices (rather than what are called WAC or list prices). Whilst these effects are playing out, both industries are subsidising healthcare reform directly. Corporate stooge my fat arse. None of that backs up Fish's claim he's affected the change promised in his early rhetoric. What period is that $100Bn coming in from the insurers over btw? Never heard that figure and the combined profits of the top 5 suppliers are only about a tenth of that aren't they? He couldnt even affect a watered down version because of resistance. He lost the mid-terms because centrist voters have dropped him, not because of disaffected lefties abstaining. The $100bn is coming from pharma, not insurance. I presume they have to pay too. So that's a different matter....it was an insurance blowjob. If you think losing centrals lost him the election then I think you're completely wrong. He lost Everyone who wouldn't usually vote....but were inspired to vote by his inspirational 2008 promise of the world....ending wars, stopping torture, universal healthcare. Think he was just reading all that guff off little telly screens innit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniffer 0 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Elite stooge or clever well meaning black man? Quick question Parky, why bring race into it? Its the main reason he was elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10963 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 See I don't think Obama is a stooge, I think that despite his good intentions, America is so entangled in the pocket of big business that it would take decades for him to actually deliver the changes he's promised. I really believe that two terms of Obama and a cessation of sensational rhetoric from the extremists from both parties and you would begin to see a more progressive America. One unafraid of terms like Socialism and Change I agree it's not Obama's fault like, it's been set up like this for decades ever since corporations became humnan in the eyes of the law. Everyone's a stooge because everyone relies on corporate funding to get any power. What's disappointing is that he tells people it's any different and "yes we can" affect change. I don't buy that anyone can change that around in any number of terms. It needs the voters to move away from the two parties on the payroll. Sensational rhetoric is just cable news catnip. It has no effect whatsoever on what gets lobbied through the houses. Which, imo, is more likely to happen under Obama than any President in my life time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 See I don't think Obama is a stooge, I think that despite his good intentions, America is so entangled in the pocket of big business that it would take decades for him to actually deliver the changes he's promised. I really believe that two terms of Obama and a cessation of sensational rhetoric from the extremists from both parties and you would begin to see a more progressive America. One unafraid of terms like Socialism and Change I agree it's not Obama's fault like, it's been set up like this for decades ever since corporations became humnan in the eyes of the law. Everyone's a stooge because everyone relies on corporate funding to get any power. What's disappointing is that he tells people it's any different and "yes we can" affect change. I don't buy that anyone can change that around in any number of terms. It needs the voters to move away from the two parties on the payroll. Sensational rhetoric is just cable news catnip. It has no effect whatsoever on what gets lobbied through the houses. Which, imo, is more likely to happen under Obama than any President in my life time. Can't see that either tbh. Think the course is set now. They're heading for the cliff and China's ready to step in and show that the democratic experiment has failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Obama's human rights report card.... http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2011/01/13...urity-policy-2/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) Regarding big business/corporate corruption, the general consensus amongst smart-bastard commentators (ie Gore Vidal) for a long time has been to: limit election campaigns to a short period, ban TV advertising and limit the funding of said campaigns drastically. Until that happens the whole system is decrepit and will corrupt anyone involved in it. That may in fact be a prerequisite (being corrupt, or at least compromising one's values) to get involved in the current political system in the US. When judging Obama's presidency it has to be taken into account that this is one of the most difficult moments in US history, especially for a Democrat president facing huge resistance against every measure he proposes. Is he intelligent? - Damn straight. One of the most intellectually capable presidents ever, apparently. Is he well-meaning? - Yup, although this is hard to quantify. It could be argued that G. Bush was well meaning. Neither of the above necessarily make a great president, and there's plenty to be critical of. I would say this: he's certainly better - so far - than his recent predecessors (Bush jr. and Clinton; both terrible). I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. Edited January 14, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Regarding big business/corporate corruption, the general consensus amongst smart-bastard commentators (ie Gore Vidal) for a long time has been to: limit election campaigns to a short period, ban TV advertising and limit the funding of said campaigns drastically. Until that happens the whole system is decrepit and will corrupt anyone involved in it. That may in fact be a prerequisite (being corrupt, or at least compromising one's values) to get involved in the current political system in the US. When judging Obama's presidency it has to be taken into account that this is one of the most difficult moments in US history, especially for a Democrat president facing huge resistance against every measure he proposes. Is he intelligent? - Damn straight. One of the most intellectually capable presidents ever, apparently. Is he well-meaning? - Yup, although this is hard to quantify. It could be argued that G. Bush was well meaning. Neither of the above necessarily make a great president, and there's plenty to be critical of. I would say this: he's certainly better - so far - than his recent predecessors (Bush jr. and Clinton; both terrible). I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. It was Clinton who started the sub-prime debacle back in the day with legislation the guppie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. Probably reacted better to the previous attack on the WTC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. Probably reacted better to the previous attack on the WTC. Do you think he reacted well in bombing 3rd world countries every time he was accused of getting a blow-job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 It was Clinton who started the sub-prime debacle back in the day with legislation the guppie. Was that his pet fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. I'd be interested in hearing yours rather than Hitchen's tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. I'd be interested in hearing yours rather than Hitchen's tbh Too young to form my own opinion on him, so Hitchen's will do nicely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. I'd be interested in hearing yours rather than Hitchen's tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I would be interested to hear people's views on Clinton - a corrupt liar; a pretend black man; a probably rapist; a bad sax player - tbh, as he seems to be quite popular with some people, for the mere fact that he isn't a gun-toting born-again bible-thumper, and because he obviously put his status to good use in banging plenty of interns and coworkers during his Presidency. I'd be interested in hearing yours rather than Hitchen's tbh Too young to form my own opinion on him, so Hitchen's will do nicely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Clinton - a real star Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Clinton - a real star Didn't you tip him off to that assassination attempt in the Phillipines in 96? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 never met him - but someone I work for has done several times - hate his politics but reckons he is so bloody charismatic you just can't believe it....................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10963 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 never met him - but someone I work for has done several times - hate his politics but reckons he is so bloody charismatic you just can't believe it....................... You know Walter Mitty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 never met him - but someone I work for has done several times - hate his politics but reckons he is so bloody charismatic you just can't believe it....................... You know Walter Mitty? no - some very well off Texans........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share Posted January 15, 2011 never met him - but someone I work for has done several times - hate his politics but reckons he is so bloody charismatic you just can't believe it....................... You know Walter Mitty? no - some very well off Texans........... Can we con them out of their money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniffer 0 Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 I doubt if you could, Parky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now