| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/14/2013 03:32:09 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Check out this article. |
I'm sorry. I got about as far into that article from the WSJ (another fine Murdock product) as I did the article from the Rolling Stone. At least the Rolling Stone article reported factual actions in a manner of whithering contempt, as opposed to licking up drivel like ""We just spent the last three months talking about nothing else but ObamaCare. It has been on the front page of every newspaper. The polls show ObamaCare's more unpopular than ever."
Does the "reporter" ever bother to check the blatant lies he is hearing? Heck no. He is just a simple herald, he has no duty to check what his interview is saying against verifiable truth, which anyone who has an internet connection is capable of doing(Obamacare still only kind of popular, like always) But repotage has become a simple parroting of canned viewpoints and if the guy your boss wants to promote is feeding you a line of factually fractured politispeak, why should your ethics as a reporter to tell the truth to your reading public get in the way of you getting your paycheck?
This article a book report, not a news article. A news reporter is not supposed to be a dictation machine. Middle school mimeograph machines do more fact checking than is done in this article.
Sure the poor Heritage foundation doesn't get enough press for the amount of dollars they spend trying to buy it, and thank God Rupert Murdock is there to rectify the balance of those few brave souls willing to speak up for the far right ultra rich like it's originator and patrons Joseph and Adolf Coors, General Motors, Ford Motors, Proctor and Gamble, Chase Manhattan Bank, Dow Chemical, the Reader's Digest Association, Mobil Oil, and Smith Kline Corporation and others who pay for this foundation to try to make the country a better place for their ideology and profits. Without the Heritage Foundation, who would speak for those poor downtrodden souls ?
It has been interesting to watch Murdock try to grind the New York Times out of existence as he uses the once proud Wall Street Journal as pestle to the ever more slimy New York Post as mortar.
Message edited by author 2013-10-14 04:02:01. |
|
|
|
10/14/2013 07:53:38 AM · #27 |
The funniest part of this is that many, if not all, of the concepts included in "Obamacare" originated with conservatives. The individual mandate was the brainchild of the aforementioned Heritage Foundation. It's amusing (and sad) to watch them talk on one hand about their proposed laws requiring people to be personally responsible, while at the same time frothing at the mouth over the individual mandate in the ACA.
I think they're just mad their ideas are actually being implemented by the democrats and a black president.
Message edited by author 2013-10-14 07:55:28. |
|
|
|
10/14/2013 08:37:22 AM · #28 |
This shutdown, though serious, is a political sideshow brought on by party leaders from both sides who would rather do battle than actually lead. If anyone bears responsibility, it is certain individuals, namely: John Boehner, Mitch McConnell on the right, and Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barack Obama on the left. The fact that bills are not coming up for a vote is only the responsibility of each house speaker. They are the only ones who can make that happen. The tone set in Irresponsible speeches that attack individuals rather than discuss the problem are at the feet of the remaining house leaders. And a president who would rather side with his party than negotiate on behalf of the American people is a childish act based on his own hubris.
What is interesting and has flown so far under the radars as not to be even discussed is that during this shutdown, 60 Senators and something like 120 members of congress have signed on to a letter to the President stating that they do not support fast track approval status for the Trans Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement. They have joined together to express how harmful they feel this agreement would be to the American Economy. It is I strong show of bipartisan support in the midst of partisan drama... Evidence that there is still hope.
As a voter, I would vote to throw the leadership out over this mess. And my gut feeling is that the republicans are going to be punished hard in the next election, perhaps to the point of no longer being a viable national party with only pockets of strongholds scattered throughout the south and Midwest. Demographically, the base can't support their victories anymore. The numbers do not add up.
Message edited by author 2013-10-14 08:39:13. |
|
|
|
10/14/2013 10:11:11 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by EL-ROI:
This shutdown, though serious, is a political sideshow brought on by party leaders from both sides who would rather do battle than actually lead. If anyone bears responsibility, it is certain individuals, namely: John Boehner, Mitch McConnell on the right, and Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barack Obama on the left. The fact that bills are not coming up for a vote is only the responsibility of each house speaker. They are the only ones who can make that happen. The tone set in Irresponsible speeches that attack individuals rather than discuss the problem are at the feet of the remaining house leaders. And a president who would rather side with his party than negotiate on behalf of the American people is a childish act based on his own hubris.
What is interesting and has flown so far under the radars as not to be even discussed is that during this shutdown, 60 Senators and something like 120 members of congress have signed on to a letter to the President stating that they do not support fast track approval status for the Trans Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement. They have joined together to express how harmful they feel this agreement would be to the American Economy. It is I strong show of bipartisan support in the midst of partisan drama... Evidence that there is still hope.
As a voter, I would vote to throw the leadership out over this mess. And my gut feeling is that the republicans are going to be punished hard in the next election, perhaps to the point of no longer being a viable national party with only pockets of strongholds scattered throughout the south and Midwest. Demographically, the base can't support their victories anymore. The numbers do not add up. |
A real "problem" is that some individual "Republican" representatives in the House have decided they no longer need to fear or obey the party leadership and can go off on whatever loony tangent they wish. |
|
|
|
10/14/2013 11:16:44 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Check out this article. |
I'm sorry. I got about as far into that article from the WSJ (another fine Murdock product) as I did the article from the Rolling Stone. At least the Rolling Stone article reported factual actions in a manner of whithering contempt, as opposed to licking up drivel like ""We just spent the last three months talking about nothing else but ObamaCare. It has been on the front page of every newspaper. The polls show ObamaCare's more unpopular than ever." |
But here's the point Brennan. The reporter dutifully quotes his subject without over editorializing. OF COURSE this guy is one of those people who has tunnel vision for his own agenda. But we, as the reader, are smart enough to see that, aren't we? So we see some of "what is wrong". We also get some actual ideas of their vision of why they think these things in other quotes.
I'm not coming over to your house to vet your reading material. :) But personally, I think this article is a better example of journalism (even presented on the "OPINION" page as a secondary warning to the reader). Some day things will be wrong on the other side of the aisle. And when that day comes, I won't be reading the WSJ to find out why. I'll be reading the Washington Post or NY Times. They will be better sourced and better informed on those matters.
EDIT: Some of those informative quotes I was talking about:
"If conservative groups like Heritage Action hadn't raised the stakes on ObamaCare, we'd be debating on their side of the football field talking about tax increases, gun control, more spending and amnesty for illegal immigrants" (we see they are considering it an obstruction to considering other things on the liberal agenda)
"I think people who don't follow politics as closely as you and I do, which is most normal people, only pay attention when something major's going on." (probably true, but we see they feel you have to go big or nobody cares)
""Look, ObamaCare is going to be the end of the American free-enterprise health-care system. We needed a plan to stop it." (We see the typical conservative view that the free market is a better system.)
Without a quote we get the author explaining, "This power-of-the-purse issue is a huge bone of contention between the left and the right as they grapple over how the $3.5 trillion government in Washington gets funded. Mr. Obama contends that one party controlling one chamber of the legislature doesn't have the unilateral right to decide what gets funded and what doesn't. Conservatives like Mr. Needham insist that the liberals are wrong." That's new and interesting.
Message edited by author 2013-10-14 11:23:35. |
|
|
|
10/14/2013 11:47:14 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Without a quote we get the author explaining, "This power-of-the-purse issue is a huge bone of contention between the left and the right as they grapple over how the $3.5 trillion government in Washington gets funded. Mr. Obama contends that one party controlling one chamber of the legislature doesn't have the unilateral right to decide what gets funded and what doesn't. Conservatives like Mr. Needham insist that the liberals are wrong." That's new and interesting. |
It's not new or interesting.
The budget, debt limit and gov't shutdown are just a distraction from the real problem. The only interesting part is watching the Republicans spin the Democrat's implementation of ideas originally promoted by conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation as a bad thing. They just hate the idea that Obama will get credit for something they should have done years ago.
I'm sure they're also scared of the idea that the ACA is probably the first step in removing the tie between a person's employer and their healthcare. |
|
|
|
10/15/2013 03:45:44 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
I'm sure they're also scared of the idea that the ACA is probably the first step in removing the tie between a person's employer and their healthcare. |
It's actually the first the first step in government funded single payer healthcare. It's a shame we have to go through the destruction of our current system to achieve government healthcare. But hell I thought it was a shame we pissed away enough money to pay for ten years of "free" healthcare in Iraq and Afghanistan. You guys must be too young to remember Mohammed Ali's "Rope a Dope" strategy. Divide the electorate into as many whining groups as possible to prevent them from working together to better the nation as a whole. When they are tired from all the Red/Blue, Republican/Democrat, liberal/conservative, fighting drop the hammer on them. Freedom lost, yoke of tyranny installed forever.
Your favorite enemy is Ali's belly. You're pounding on it for all you're worth. You're almost out of breath. Get ready for that blow that knocks you on the mat. |
|
|
|
10/15/2013 08:09:22 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I'd be fascinated to see how any of our uber-conservative DPCers respond to this incredibly in-depth piece of reporting, or indeed whether any of them bother to read it to the end, because it sure as heck debunks a lot of their claims...
Inside the Republican Suicide Machine |
The source may be more significant - and persuasive - than the material of the message |
|
|
|
10/15/2013 08:31:36 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But we, as the reader, are smart enough to see that, aren't we? |
No. Most readers are not smart enough by half.
I have friends from high school on my facebook "friends" list that I haven't seen in 30+ years. When I see what some of them post I can't imagine how they got so freaking stupid. Today, one of them has a story up about how snipers on the white house roof are there to assassinate veterans. When you only listen to one news source, you do not learn to weed out the fiction from the fact. |
|
|
|
10/15/2013 10:59:52 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If one wants to learn what is really wrong with the Republican party [...] A real article might look at the polarization of both parties and the reasons why the process of negotiation that has existed for decades (or longer) has broken down. |
Take a look at this. You should appreciate this fact (in bold): "Congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein are no strangers to D.C. politics. The two of them have been in Washington for more than 40 years — and they're renowned for their carefully nonpartisan positions." (emphasis added) |
|
|
|
10/15/2013 12:31:02 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If one wants to learn what is really wrong with the Republican party [...] A real article might look at the polarization of both parties and the reasons why the process of negotiation that has existed for decades (or longer) has broken down. |
Take a look at this. You should appreciate this fact (in bold): "Congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein are no strangers to D.C. politics. The two of them have been in Washington for more than 40 years — and they're renowned for their carefully nonpartisan positions." (emphasis added) |
That looks like a source I would put some weight in. |
|
|
|
10/16/2013 04:58:14 AM · #37 |
So if Obama dumps Obamacare, they'll let him increase the debt ceiling? - Is that what all this is about?
They're nearly out of time now before the bills are due. The bondholders (i.e. China) are getting nervous, and lets see what happens to the credit rating off the back of this.
All because of political ego? |
|
|
|
10/16/2013 10:17:04 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by JH:
So if Obama dumps Obamacare, they'll let him increase the debt ceiling? - Is that what all this is about?
They're nearly out of time now before the bills are due. The bondholders (i.e. China) are getting nervous, and lets see what happens to the credit rating off the back of this.
All because of political ego? |
Because the Republicans have been hijacked by some nuts willing to drive the nation over the brink in pursuit of their extremist agenda. |
|
|
|
10/16/2013 05:41:51 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by JH:
So if Obama dumps Obamacare, they'll let him increase the debt ceiling? - Is that what all this is about?
They're nearly out of time now before the bills are due. The bondholders (i.e. China) are getting nervous, and lets see what happens to the credit rating off the back of this.
All because of political ego? |
It's of much greater significance than political ego. As pointed out in the WSJ opinion piece that Jason posted (thanks, by the way... very informative), Heritage Action is the lobbyist group that has the destruction of Obamacare as their mission, and they are essentially the political strategist for the Tea Party Republicans, the faction that has put the government on blocks by refusing to pass a clean funding bill (something many other Republicans are in favor of).
When Michael Needham, the Heritage Group's president, says: "I think it is babyish for him [Obama] to stand there and say, 'Despite the fact that our Constitution gives the power of the purse to the House, I refuse to respect that,'" he is essentially advocating a "hold up" of the government by the house majority every time funding is to be passed. The house may need to pass funding, but to set the precedent that the majority party picks and chooses which laws and programs receive funding every year creates instability, tremendous waste, and a severe lack of perspective. It may suit him at this particular juncture, but he's obviously not looked ahead to when the Democrats will inevitably hold majority.
He, Heritage Action and the Tea Party are the new face of scorched-earth politics. |
|
|
|
10/16/2013 05:46:23 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
When Michael Needham, the Heritage Group's president, says: "... to set the precedent that the majority party picks and chooses which laws and programs receive funding every year creates instability, tremendous waste, and a severe lack of perspective. |
Funny, I thought the idea of majority-rule democracy was that the side with the most votes gets its way ...
 |
|
|
|
10/16/2013 08:16:12 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
the Heritage Group's president, says: "I think it is babyish for him [Obama] to stand there and say, 'Despite the fact that our Constitution gives the power of the purse to the House, I refuse to respect that,'" |
The power of the purse does NOT include to power to refuse payment on laws you passed and spending you mandated. |
|
|
|
10/17/2013 05:41:48 PM · #42 |
It's Over!
Originally posted by Dave Ross:
The House of Representatives, after 16 days in a strange and colorful land, finally discovered that it could have returned to reality whenever it wanted to. And according to Standard and Poors, the cost to the economy of these last 16 days totaled $24 billion.
We lost $24 billion to discover that even politicians, who ran against Big Government, ended up wanting to restore just about everything that Big Government was doing.
We lost $24 billion delaying a result which the president predicted 16 days ago.
"There are enough reasonable Republicans and Democrats in the House who are willing to vote yes, shutdown would be over," said Obama.
Twenty-four billion dollars delaying a result which Senator McCain predicted again eight days ago.
"We know how it is going to end. We will raise the debt limit," said McCain.
But maybe, maybe it was money well spent. Because we got to know Senator Ted Cruz.
"We should fund the VA, Mr. President. The majority leader of the Senate refused to allow the Senate even to vote," said Cruz.
And yes, it may have cost $24 billion. But hearing an opponent of government-run health care passionately supporting the veterans administration? Priceless. |
|
|
|
|
10/17/2013 06:06:07 PM · #43 |
The good news is $24 billion is a drop in the GDP bucket (about 1.5% to be exact). It could possibly have been much worse. It also shows the hill we have to climb. If pundits like Dave Ross feel it's worth paragraphs to complain about $24 billion, wait until we have to make actual, REAL cuts in our budget (which will naturally cost our GDP more than $24 billion).
Glad it's over though.
Message edited by author 2013-10-17 19:11:25. |
|
|
|
10/17/2013 06:52:35 PM · #44 |
I hear ya Doc, 24 billion here and 24 billion there and first thing ya know, you're talking real money. :O)
In real dollars it may be only 24 billion, but I wonder what impact this type of activity will have on the international markets and the USA's credit rating in the long run.
Methinks you folks ain't out of the woods yet.
Ray
|
|
|
|
10/18/2013 07:38:50 AM · #45 |
|
|
|
10/18/2013 07:46:39 AM · #46 |
| Of course, the real winner here is China. |
|
|
|
10/18/2013 09:30:48 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by JH:
Of course, the real winner here is China. |
Getting paid what is owed you is NOT in most circles considered a win.
...and I would wager that Japan is not all that far behind when it comes to monies owed them by the USA.
Ray
Message edited by author 2013-10-18 09:31:57. |
|
|
|
10/18/2013 09:50:14 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...and I would wager that Japan is not all that far behind when it comes to monies owed them by the USA. |
Well, you're right about that: we owe China 1.26 trillion and Japan 1.12 trillion, 11% and 9.6%, respectively, of our debt. But neither of them tops the list of creditors of the good 'ol USA:
Creditor Name: American Public and State and Local Governments
Amount of U.S. Debt Owned (January 2013): $4.14 trillion
Percent of U.S. Public Debt (January 2013): 36 percent
Surprise! The country the United States is most indebted to is ... itself. Actually, the federal government borrows from a host of domestic investors, including private citizens, banks, corporations, local and state governments, and investment funds. Here is a breakdown of the top domestic investors in U.S. public debt as of September 2012, the latest figures available [source: Financial Management Service]:
Insurance companies: $263.8 billion
Depository institutions (commercial banks, credit unions): $337.4 billion
State and local governments: $492.2 billion
State and local government pension funds: $190.3 billion
Private pension funds: $615.6 billion
Mutual funds: $889.1 billion
U.S. savings bonds: $183.8 billion`
Other investors (Includes individuals, government-sponsored enterprises, brokers and dealers, trusts and estates, businesses, and more): $1.172 trillion
source |
|
|
|
10/22/2013 06:53:27 PM · #49 |
Does anybody out there disagree that the website rollout for the ACA is a feather in the cap of the "private sector is better than government" mentality? This morning NPR was, for a brief few minutes, sounding like the Wall Street Journal with interviews talking about how the website has been a pretty botched process.
|
|
|
|
10/22/2013 07:24:35 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does anybody out there disagree that the website rollout for the ACA is a feather in the cap of the "private sector is better than government" mentality? This morning NPR was, for a brief few minutes, sounding like the Wall Street Journal with interviews talking about how the website has been a pretty botched process. |
Sure, and my bet is that this will only get worse with time.
As it is, my deductible went from $1,000 annual max to $7,000 annual max, and I'm not nearly as well covered, and I'm paying about 50% more...
Yeah, this is just fucking awesome, thanks big government for intruding in my life even further, I really appreciate it. While you're at it, could you please send a SWAT team to renovate my house? |
|
