«   |   »

This Country Is So Screwed

by Ben Hoffman

We don’t have a government of, by, or for the people. We have a government for special interests and big business. The majority of people want health insurance reform including the public option, but it looks like that is going to fall by the wayside. Obviously the banking sector needs to be regulated, but it doesn’t look like that’s going to happen. Because of the Bush and Reagan tax cuts for the wealthy, we’re in debt up to our eyeballs, but there’s no way taxes are going to be raised on the wealthy when politicians are financed by the wealthy. The recent credit card legislation will do little to reign in abuses by the credit card industry. It had to be watered down to garner enough votes to pass. And with all the voting irregularities of the past decade, where’s election reform?

When we elected Obama in 2008, we thought we were voting for pragmatism. Instead, what we got was conservative lite. After all this time, Obama still thinks he can compromise with Republicans to get things done. And why the hell does Timothy Geithner still have a job. It’s pathetic.

Posted on February 24, 2010 at 9:46 AM in Education, Politics   |  RSS feed |   Reply   |   Trackback URL

34 Comments to “This Country Is So Screwed”

    
  1. Alan Scott
    February 24, 2010 at 4:45 PM

    Mr. Hoffman,

    ” The majority of people want health insurance reform including the public option, ”

    I doubt that is still true, or so many Democrats would not be scared to vote for it again. Once the folks learned the dirty details of Obama-care, and they sure are dirty, they turned away.

    Now if you actually have a recent poll, one that is honest, post it .

    Reply
  2. pino
    February 24, 2010 at 8:28 PM

    We don’t have a government of, by, or for the people

    I agree.

    The majority of people want health insurance reform

    I agree.

    including the public option,

    Until you start asking the question with the downsides included:

    1. You will mandated to purchase coverage and will be fined/jailed if you don’t.

    2. Your rates will go up.

    3. A government panel, perhaps head by the next Dick Cheney, will decide your care, not you and your family.

    Because of the Bush and Reagan tax cuts for the wealthy, we’re in debt up to our eyeballs

    We’re in debt because we spend too much.

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      February 24, 2010 at 10:31 PM

      [Until you start asking the question with the downsides included:

      1. You will mandated to purchase coverage and will be fined/jailed if you don’t.

      2. Your rates will go up.

      3. A government panel, perhaps head by the next Dick Cheney, will decide your care, not you and your family.]

      Sure, if you lie to them, they’ll be against it. How about if we use the same approach for the abortion argument:

      1. Abortion is fine because the fetus doesn’t have a nervous system until it’s born.

      2. Abortion is fine because a fetus doesn’t have a heart until it’s born.

      3. Abortion is fine because a fetus is already dead and then brought to life when it’s born.

      See, abortion is perfectly fine and nobody should be against it. It should be a common procedure and can also be used as birth control.

      Reply
  3. Moe
    February 26, 2010 at 8:37 AM

    If we didn’t have a media owned by the same large corporations that snuggle up with our congress critters … oh forget it – I’m dreaming.

    Reply
  4. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 26, 2010 at 8:54 AM

    Alan,
    actually the latest polls, taken in 2010 show an even split on this particular version of the bill, but that the majority of people want something and soon. Additionally, they also favor a public option. Don’t believe me? I have several valid source links in the latest post of my blog.

    Reply
  5. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 26, 2010 at 8:57 AM

    Ben, not sure if I’d go so far as to say Obama is con lite, but he is definitly much more center than he is left. But if you listen to the media lapdogs he’s stalin reincarnate.

    Reply
    • Moe
      February 26, 2010 at 9:12 AM

      And I was always amused that they called Bill Clinton a liberal. He of the Democratic Leadership Council, which is where they invented con lite.

      It would seem the media has never seen a liberal.

      Reply
  6. Alan Scott
    February 26, 2010 at 7:16 PM

    Mr. Hoffman,

    ” Because of the Bush and Reagan tax cuts for the wealthy, we’re in debt up to our eyeballs, but there’s no way taxes are going to be raised on the wealthy when politicians are financed by the wealthy. ”

    Every time you state this untruth I will call you on it .

    Overspending has always been the problem .

    Every time you elect a spendocrat you vote yourself money stolen from some other private citizen .

    There are many famous quotes about democracy failing when inevitably we all vote for candidates who promise us the most benefits from the public treasury . You liberals rationalize the immorality of this theft by demonizing the productive members of society, and by such phrases as ” tax cuts for the wealthy, “.

    The Conservative Lie,

    ” actually the latest polls, taken in 2010 show an even split on this particular version of the bill, but that the majority of people want something and soon. Additionally, they also favor a public option. Don’t believe me? I have several valid source links in the latest post of my blog. ”

    You’re right I do not believe you . But to humor you I will go reluctantly to your site .

    ” Ben, not sure if I’d go so far as to say Obama is con lite, but he is definitly much more center than he is left ”

    Compared to whom, Mao Tse-tung ?

    Moe,

    ” If we didn’t have a media owned by the same large corporations that snuggle up with our congress critters … oh forget it – I’m dreaming. ”

    I agree, GE really sucks .

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      February 26, 2010 at 10:22 PM

      [Overspending has always been the problem .]

      Well, we had a budget surplus under Clinton and huge deficits under Bush. So I guess the Republicans during the Bush administration are guilty of overspending. I’d agree with that regarding the trillion dollars we spent on the Iraq war.

      Reply
    • The Arbourist
      February 27, 2010 at 10:44 AM

      Ben Hoffman said :” Because of the Bush and Reagan tax cuts for the wealthy, we’re in debt up to our eyeballs, but there’s no way taxes are going to be raised on the wealthy when politicians are financed by the wealthy. ”

      Alan Scott said: Every time you state this untruth I will call you on it .
      Overspending has always been the problem .

      Actually, Ben is correct on this point. Starting with Reagan, the deregulation of your economic system coupled with the massive wealthfare policies have seriously weakened the US.

      Joseph Stiglitz in this short interview explains much about the current economic crisis and how it was perpetuated and how it will continue to play out. One of the key points he makes as I mentioned above, financial deregulation and wealthcare are important contributing factors to the current economic situation.

      Every time you elect a spendocrat you vote yourself money stolen from some other private citizen

      Did you pry this little gem off the boilerplate at the libertarian/teaparty convention? Rwanda and a few other despotic countries are living the libertarian wet dream of no state intervention against their personal liberty. The freedom from ‘big guv’ment’, however, does not bode well for the market or life expectancy.

      You liberals rationalize the immorality of this theft by demonizing the productive members of society, and by such phrases as ” tax cuts for the wealthy.

      You seem to want enshrine the idea that predatory capitalism, the robber barons, and ruthless exploitation of the poor is a good thing for the country.

      Moe said:

      ” If we didn’t have a media owned by the same large corporations that snuggle up with our congress critters … oh forget it – I’m dreaming. ”

      Alan Scott said: I agree, GE really sucks .

      I note your choice of corporations Mr.Scott and it seems to be endemic in your how you express your point of view.

      Succinctly, if you cannot frame your arguments within a stark left/right dichotomy, then you will not make the argument.

      Moe’s point was that the overall corporate control of most of the media is not good a democratic country. You mention GE, which from a previous thread, you went after Olbermann as clear cut example of ‘left-wing bias’ in the media.

      You miss or ignore the point that generally speaking, the media has a systematic bias toward the right of the spectrum. So rather than engage in meaningful debate, it would seem you would rather cloud the arguments with artless partisan hackery.

      AS: Every time you state this untruth I will call you on it .

      And I you Mr.Scott. 🙂

      Reply
      • Ben Hoffman
        February 27, 2010 at 10:58 AM

        Alan’s political views are the product of his environment. He lives in Philadelphia where there is a lot of poverty, filth, crime, and welfare. He blames those problems on government entitlement programs enacted by Democrats. In some respects, he’s right, but there are greater issues facing our country at this time.

    • Moe
      February 27, 2010 at 11:35 AM

      [I agree. GE really sucks.]

      OMG – Alan just agreed with me!

      Reply
  7. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 26, 2010 at 7:27 PM

    Ha ha my little ploy worked and I have driven another person to my blog of dispair! Mwuuhahahah.

    Reply
  8. Alan Scott
    February 26, 2010 at 7:33 PM

    The Conservative Lie,

    ” Ha ha my little ploy worked and I have driven another person to my blog of dispair! Mwuuhahahah. ”

    If I find intelligent life there, I may even come back . I find your newsweek poll conflicts with my foxnews poll .

    Reply
  9. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 26, 2010 at 7:37 PM

    Thanks. Disregard the banter as it is all for show.

    I know about the conflicting data, but it would be a stretch to say that newsweek has a liberal bias.

    And, as you probably noticed, McClatchy has changed the site; I’ll have to update that link.

    Reply
  10. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 26, 2010 at 10:32 PM

    I assume that’s sarcasm… unfortunatly all too true to some.

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      February 26, 2010 at 11:03 PM

      [unfortunatly all too true to some.]

      True even to some news outlets. Remember a few years ago when all the news had to be “balanced” with a right-wing spin on the news? Actually, that’s still true. Whenever there’s a story about the push for health insurance reform, you almost never see the Democratic side but there’s always the Republican argument against it.

      Reply
  11. Alan Scott
    February 27, 2010 at 10:55 AM

    Mr. Hoffman,

    ” So I guess the Republicans during the Bush administration are guilty of overspending. I’d agree with that regarding the trillion dollars we spent on the Iraq war. ”

    Defending the country by a preemptive war is never badly spent money . Imagine, if you can, that FDR, Chamberlin, and whatever French liberal running France had preemptively taken out Der Furer when he first began violating the Treaty of Versailles . In 1936, before his military was strong .

    They would have been as unpopular as George W. Bush. Your philosophical ancestors would have declared them war mongers. Your philosophical ancestors would have derided the deficits they would have run up, the deaths they caused .

    They would have saved billions of dollars and 60 million lives .

    At any rate, Republicans did spend on other things like amateur Democrats . Which is why the real professional spenders are , for the moment, running things .

    Reply
    • Moe
      February 27, 2010 at 11:44 AM

      [Defending the country by a preemptive war is never badly spent money . Imagine, if you can, that FDR, Chamberlin, and whatever French liberal running France had preemptively taken out Der Furer when he first began violating the Treaty of Versailles . In 1936, before his military was strong .]

      Gotta say Alan, that one takes the cake. Amazing. So the US and England and France should have invaded Germany in 1936? And you say that would have saved 60 million lives.

      Don’t you realize that such an action would have set off an even bigger world war? And that Germany would have ended up with many many more allies than she had in reality?

      And there would have been no Marshall plan and Germany would still be a mess.

      Brilliant.

      Reply
  12. Maureen Holland
    February 27, 2010 at 12:32 PM

    WordPress question:

    WordPress keeps forgetting my password. I am just getting a new one for the fourth time. Anyone else having that experience?

    Reply
  13. Alan Scott
    February 27, 2010 at 3:27 PM

    Ms. Holland,

    ” Don’t you realize that such an action would have set off an even bigger world war? And that Germany would have ended up with many many more allies than she had in reality?

    And there would have been no Marshall plan and Germany would still be a mess.

    Brilliant. ”

    I never realized you were a WW2 and history buff, as I am . So please give me your scenario of how this would have been a bigger World War . I mean it was really big anyway . Also who were the countries that would have gone to Germany’s defense ?

    I should add that the US probably should have attacked Japan for what it was doing to China . Guess what then ? No Pearl Harbor . Then maybe YOUR buddies the Europeans might have also come to the aid of Ethiopia, after their Emperor begged them for help against Italy, again in the mid 30s .

    Those were the lessons our leaders took away from World War 2 . Not to let evil get too strong before fighting it. That kind of was the point of the cold war and also Korea and Vietnam .

    All of these measures would have been far cheaper in lives and national treasure than allowing what happened . But then these leaders would have been roasted over the coals the way Bush was .

    I await your alternate telling of this historical scenario with great anticipation .

    Reply
  14. artisticphysics
    February 27, 2010 at 4:26 PM

    “WE” did not ELECT Obama in the White House, he was “SELECTED.” Just like presidents before him. This country covers our eyes and makes us believe that WE ACTUALLY VOTE for the president who gets in the White House. But thats not the case. This country is ran by Financial Institutions, not the people.

    Reply
  15. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 27, 2010 at 4:48 PM

    Well, I voted for him (5 times), so if he was selected, then they picked my horse.

    Reply
  16. The_Conservative_Lie
    February 27, 2010 at 4:56 PM

    We all do that in Chicago… Just kiddin’; it was a joke.

    Reply
  17. Alan Scott
    February 27, 2010 at 10:44 PM

    The Conservative Lie,

    ” Well, I voted for him (5 times), so if he was selected, then they picked my horse. ”

    🙂 Would that mean you arose from the grave five times ?

    ” We all do that in Chicago… Just kiddin’; it was a joke. ”

    I always knew that both the old man and the kid ( Mayors Daily ) could pull off the most miraculous feats when they had to, during an election .

    Reply
  18. The Pissed Off Tree Rat
    March 4, 2010 at 8:12 PM

    Obama as a “conservative lite”? Wow…… As a drunken conservative assault rifle toting zombie hunter I have to say I’m stumped as to how to take that. I guess that makes Bill O’Riley a liberal light. Or something to that effect. That definately makes McCain a hard core lib.

    Reply
  19. chazthespaz
    April 24, 2010 at 10:12 AM

    Honestly people, when will you all realize that it does NOT matter who is in the white house. The powers that be controlling the world, control who’s voted in, and that person is endoctrinated anyway. The world’s a mess. If you look at God as a scientist, and this were your experiment, what would you do?

    Reply
    

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: