By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 28 November 2009
Mr Khan said:

If anything, he's been too conciliatory. Trying to gain consensus when the Republicans clearly have no mind to do anything but try to water down anything he does. He should have just strong-armed all of it, and damn bi-partisanship

 

His lack of action is mostly due to his efforts to try to operate with consensus, or something as close as possible to it in our polarized political environment, instead of just steamrolling the opposition.

Actually all of his big plans have been changed more by Leftwing forces then rightwing.

Look at his healthcare bill.

It has a LOT in it that he decryed as unfair, bad for the poor and anti-democratic.

He's had more of an issue with the House Democrats taking over his legislation than anything else.

The Republican "consensus" posturing is just in the hopes he can gain back the reigns a bit to the way he wanted the healthcare.



Around the Network
TheRealMafoo on 28 November 2009
Mr Khan said:

If anything, he's been too conciliatory. Trying to gain consensus when the Republicans clearly have no mind to do anything but try to water down anything he does. He should have just strong-armed all of it, and damn bi-partisanship

 

His lack of action is mostly due to his efforts to try to operate with consensus, or something as close as possible to it in our polarized political environment, instead of just steamrolling the opposition.

Sorry, but there is nothing bi-partisan about anything he has done. His problem is not all Democrats are the same, and that party can not agree on the very extreme left (as far from bi-partisan as can be) policies they are trying to pass.



badgenome on 28 November 2009
Mr Khan said:

If anything, he's been too conciliatory.

Yeah, that's his problem...



Rath on 28 November 2009

What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.



Kasz216 on 28 November 2009
Rath said:
What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.

Which... doesn't actually mean anything.  Since intercountry politics are all that matters in such a regard.  As for his Healthcare bill... not it's EXACTLY the kind of healthcare bill he said was wrong and a bad idea in the primaries vs Hillary.

 



Around the Network
badgenome on 28 November 2009
Rath said:
What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.

If we're talking about American politics, and we are, then let me point out that right and left in this context are relative to political center of the USA.



Kasz216 on 28 November 2009
badgenome said:
Rath said:
What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.

If we're talking about American politics, and we are, then let me point out that right and left in this context are relative to political center of the USA.

It's also fair to note that healthcare always seems to be used to paint the US as really right wing... when a lot of our policies are a lot more "left" then most of Europe. (Basically everywhere not scandanavian.)



TheRealMafoo on 28 November 2009
Rath said:
What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.

1 out of 5 people in this country are on a government plan today. Hard to say we don't have social healthcare.

When this bill is pasted, not everyone will be allowed to be on government healthcare (like me for example), so calling what is being passes some sort of national healthcare for all is a lie as well.

This is pure economic redistribution, plain and simple. 



Rath on 28 November 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
Rath said:
What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.

1 out of 5 people in this country are on a government plan today. Hard to say we don't have social healthcare.

When this bill is pasted, not everyone will be allowed to be on government healthcare (like me for example), so calling what is being passes some sort of national healthcare for all is a lie as well.

This is pure economic redistribution, plain and simple. 

To be honest I would much prefer it if the USA got a NHS style system but we all know that that would never get through the American law makers.

 

However the amount of people you have who are not convered for healthcare is ridiculous in my opinion



Kasz216 on 28 November 2009
Rath said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Rath said:
What policies of his are very extreme left?

If you're talking healthcare bill then let me point out that the USA is the only developed country without some form of social healthcare. It's not extremely left to try and put some in, it's distinctly moderate.

1 out of 5 people in this country are on a government plan today. Hard to say we don't have social healthcare.

When this bill is pasted, not everyone will be allowed to be on government healthcare (like me for example), so calling what is being passes some sort of national healthcare for all is a lie as well.

This is pure economic redistribution, plain and simple. 

To be honest I would much prefer it if the USA got a NHS style system but we all know that that would never get through the American law makers.

 

However the amount of people you have who are not convered for healthcare is ridiculous in my opinion

It's less ridiculious when you look at the actual reasons for it.

A large number of uninsured qualify for government healthcare... but don't take it.

Outside of those... it's people who don't think healthcare is worth it to buy.

That and the occasional "special" case.

 

Why should the government force people to get insurance?