Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by State, Aug 12, 2009.
American Thinker: Obama Failed to Master Alinsky's Rule #12
Best article I've read in a long time.
Then I suggest you should probably read more.
America's Sweet Talking Poster Boy
Looking at him makes the Left Wing Democrats feel all gooey, now the whole country has to pay the price.
His friggin Czars are all a bunch of a$s holes too.
That article is sour grapes. Obama's doing well. FDR and Clitnon, too, tried to get health care passed. It's not easy, and the political hacks and insurance companies have a tight alliance, even using Sarah Palin to spread an absurd lies about "death panels." The proof that Obama knew how difficult this fight would be is that he built an alliance with the pharmaceutical companies, so they will be doing some advertising in favor of the plan. It's not a natural alliance, a progressive president with an industry that bilks consumers, but it's a necessary one given that conservatives are really staking everything on stopping the healthcare plan.
As far as Obama's tightly controlled town hall meeting, I'll take PatsWickedPissah's report anyday over the MSM, which is surely well connected to the insurance industry. I think Obama is ready to answer any questions, because the right has no good questions and instead is resorting to absurd claims and fear tactics. As far Obama not submitting his own plan, that was a strategic decision. He wisely chose to let Congress take ownership, while he and his staff have met consistently behind the scenes. Congress has a lot vested in passage of the plan, so I don't think this plan will go the way of Hillary care. If it loses, it will lose in a vote in Congress, not simply by fading away.
Otherwise, the article is rather thin, and if it's the best you've read in a long time, perhaps you're not good at choosing what to read. Perhaps you should read Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. It's quite short and pragmatic. Obama is quite pragmatic, too, whether or not he strictly follows the 50 year old Rules for Radicals or chooses a more updated approach to getting things done in DC.
An Obama, Big Pharma alliance. Great. :bricks:
What, me the English teacher who reads so much my wife calls herself a "book widow"?
But I'm not POTUS with a pronounced ignorance of things historical and geographical. I have never, for example, visited all 57 US states.
I knew the Soviets liberated Auschwitz, not the Americans. Not Obama. PolitiFact | Obama's Auschwitz error
The Berlin airlift a UN or world-wide endeavor? Hardly. But that's what our community organizer Chicago pol thinks. HANSON: Obama's history is off - Washington Times
Every article you have read is the best you have read in a long time.. interesting that people quote Alinski who do not understand Alinski...
The whole CO thing is a method, and to take one piece out and say he did not follow it goes against what Alinski taught, this reminds me of the euthanasia debate.. something taken out of context and twisted to meet someone's agenda...
That's a victory for the Libertarian know nothings.
Well... that's entirely irrelevant. I thought we were discussing a crappy article that makes plenty of assertions sans evidence and offers no substantive alternative to what Obama and the Democrats have put on the table.
That's really is a shame, though. If these gaffes bother you so much, how on earth did you manage to live from 2001-2009?
American Thinker, "we reserve the right to be partisan...."
You lost me with this one. Could you explain? I'm not being a dink either. I'm curious what you mean. I think libertarians are on the money with some issues, yet totally ridiculous with others.
Well, under someone like, say, Ron Paul, what exactly would be a stop gap measure for corporations basically running the government?
People complain about pork, but what is to stop corporations from basically buying politicians?
All libertarians are doing is reducing government strength and filling that power vacuum with more corporate power. There would literally be no democratic recourse for runaway corporate power. Everything the government does would be through private industry (i.e. Big Pharma).
Ah, ok. I hear ya here. The zero regulation bit by libertarians is one of the places where they lose me (borders is another one). I like freer markets, but a market cannot be competely free. There has to be a base set of rules, and regulations. Of course, the flip side for me, is that I hate the nanny state, and an over regulated market (or life).
BTW, I've always been an advocate of higher penalties for public officials who are convicted of a crime. We have cop killer laws, but we don't have a corrupt politician law, where a pol who screws the people, gets a harsher sentence for his crime.
But libertarianism is basically legalized corruption. Instead of government run programs (which may be flawed) that are somewhat answerable to the people, you have everything in the private sphere. Instead of Big Pharma being "allied" with the government, you'd have Big pharma designing everything, wrecking the FDA (what little is left of it) and serving only their own profit model. This is why libertarianism is such a silly trend. It's basically a way for people to sit back and call everyone in the discussion stupid while calling for a system that would be an absolute nightmare.
Agree completely, how many times does a pol get convicted and come back as a revered radio talk show host, political TV commentator or some other such nonsensical job.. if it was that easy for any other thief to find work.. bad enough they send them to a club fed... let them do real time, none of this pansy crap...
There should be higher standards for folks in who we place such a high level of trust...
Boy, your list of Net publications you dismiss grows daily. Drudge Report, World Net Daily, American Thinker, Town Hall.
Let's just say anything that's not actively liberal is suspect from your point of view. Am I wrong? Or do you consider the NYT to be unbiased?
The Volokh Conspiracy - -
Rostenkowski went to jail, though I think Bush I pardoned him. I was surprised how harsh his sentence was.
I can't believe the gray hairs rocking his car occurred 20 years ago. Jeez, I'm getting old.
LOL. I hate to break it to you but not many people take those seriously, at least not anyone who wants actual facts involved in news reporting. All news is biased in some way, that's human nature, but to compare the NYT to those is laughable. If you want a progressive counterpart it's Huffpost or Think Progress or any of those that right wingers similarly disregard due to "bias."
The problem is that it's not just about bias, but about accuracy. They may be equally biased but unlike World Nut Daily or Town Hall, places like the Huffington Post don't just completely make things up and pawn it off to their uneducated readers.
Pimping this site big time today, eh??? Is this your new best thing you have read in a long time???... perhaps you issues with space and time..
Separate names with a comma.