Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (552093)	2/25/2010 4:49:09 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572348

Tim, down below is so typical. Winger leaders are forever tripping themselves up, giving leftwing bloggers a field day in exposing their inconsistencies. This has been going on for years......why would anyone, except a fool, believe anything that comes from the right. There are the exceptions......Powell for one......although that sucker led us down the primrose path to Iraq before he found religion. There are others like Chaffee of RI but he was forced to leave the GOP. An insidious corruption has taken over the GOP and it ain't pretty. In fact, it scares the bejezus out of me. OPPOSING THE IDEAS THEY SUPPORT.... I vaguely recall a time when Dems hoped Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley (R) would be one of the more sensible, reasonable members when it comes to health care talks. So much for that idea. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) -- the Republicans point man on health care reform in the Senate -- has flirted with the idea that requiring people to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional. But fully joined the "Tenther" fringe at today's health care summit. "The high cost of this bill comes from a non-constitutional mandate," Grassley said in an exchange with President Obama. On the substance, relying on an individual mandate does not increase costs; it lowers them. Grassley's understanding of the underlying policy goals is backwards. But let's put that aside. Grassley now wants us to believe individual mandates are "non-constitutional." This is the same Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) who told Fox News last summer, "I believe that there is a bipartisan consensus to have individual mandates.... There isn't anything wrong with it." It's not just Grassley. Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Bob Bennett (R-Utah), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) all are on record co-sponsoring a reform measure that included an individual mandate. The point here is not just to highlight the bizarre inconsistencies of Republican opponents of health care reform. This is also important in realizing why bipartisanship on health care has been quite literally impossible -- Republicans are willing to reject measures they've already embraced, and ideas they themselves came up with. All the Democratic outreach and compromise options in the world can't overcome the fundamental lack of seriousness that comes with a party that opposes and supports the same ideas at the same time.

To: TimF who wrote (552093)	2/25/2010 4:57:24 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572348

Not at all. I want out of Afghanistan so badly, I can taste it. Yet, I begrudgingly understood the logic of finishing the job. What does that have to do with the point at hand? Fighting in Afghanistan is very, very inconsistent with my ideology. Wanting out of Afghanistan is a desire. I never wanted to be there in the first place. Considering the idea of finishing the job, even when it goes against your immediate emptional desire might be a good thing, but it doesn't deal with the idea of listening to and seriously addressing arguments from those with very different perspectives, unless its just such an argument that convinced you to change your mind (which seems unlikely to me, but its possible), and even then it would be a single case, set against countless cases of your using ad-hominem dismissive of anything from a libertarian or even vaguely conservative sources. Agreeing to go along with Obama's plan took a lot for me. When I finally accepted it, it was for three reasons: unlike Bush, Obama is very competent and if anyone can get the job done satisfactorily, its him; secondly, it would be unfair to all involved for the US to pack up and leave abruptly; and thirdly Obama has given us an end date. A conservative could tell you the sky is blue, and you apparently would start thinking its green. A conservative could tell me the sky is blue and I would have to check it out thoroughly before believing it. You want politicians of different ideologies to "work together", but you ideas about working together seem to be lets all brainstorm about how to adopt the liberal, progressive, big government, and/or Democratic, agenda. Really working together implies paying attention to other viewpoints and achieving some sort of consensus that your going to work for, not attacking anyone who doesn't agree with you as "the party of no". First of all, I have given up on politicians of different ideologies working together particularly with the dishonesty that is so peculiar to conservative leaders. What I do want is when the very interests of this country are at stake........and that's not the case with every issue.....that our leaders set aside their differences and ideologies to come up with a resolution. Unfortunately, compromise is not a word in the conservative dictionary.