You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
If you are against any of Obama's policies, you're a racist bastard!
A lot of people out there are agaisnt Obama Care and they are being called racist, bigots, nazis, etc. by the opposition. I mean, the opposition gets really emotional about this stuff and start throwing out analogies liek crazy in an attempt to change people's minds.
go suck his dick you penis puffer!!!!!!!!!!!! your so idiotic that your mom cant even look at your dir tidir face. LOSER + U LIV IN MY SHADOW= your dumbass
No one is calling you racist for disagreeing. Conservative talking heads simply set up this strawman to get dumb people to backlash without coming up with a legitimate opposing arguement, and to create the division that served them so well during the last 8 years.
If you are against all socialist type programs, fine, that's a legitimate arguement.
If you're bringing effigies of Obama in a noose to a town hall meeting where these things are supposed to be discussed in a democratic manner then simply shouting as loud as possible that you want "your america back" or some other such non-sense, well then, you're probably racist.
I would really like to abolish public school. At the very least, if we are to have it, I want it to be at the lowest government agency possible. For example at the city level instead of the state level. There's too much money wasted on the bureaucrats who manage the large number of schools. You want more money to go to "the children," reduce the number of bureaucrats. You want to reduce the number of bureaucrats, reduce the size of the things they have to manage. You want to reduce the number of schools being managed, let the city do it.
I believe the main reason people are so upset at these town hall meetings is because there have been no details provided as to what exactly this legislation will do. I believe people are upset because they believe that they have probably read more of the actual text of the bill, then their representatives in congress have.
People will naturally resist when they are being forced to accept an idea or position that has not been clearly explained or planned out.
That is my take on why people are so loudly voicing opposition at the town hall meetings.
Please let me know if anyone has any information contradictory to what I have said. I'm still searching for the bottom of all this mess.
I believe people are upset because they believe that they have probably read more of the actual text of the bill, then their representatives in congress have.
The crazy people you see screaming on tv about "I want my America back" don't even know medicare is government healthcare. They think end of life counseling is a death panel, they think Obama wasn't born in the US.
I would be surprised if half of them were literate BeSensible.
Normal people, dem or repub, don't act like lunatics, and at least take time to get their facts straight before screaming crazy stuff on national tv.
Which is exactly why the Republican Party is slowly dying. It's been taken over by the fringes of their wing.
Meanwhile, sensible conservatives, instead of pointing out that these people are crazy, and that their senseless fear mongering and refusal to learn or talk or compromise or even look at any point of view but their own is a complete dead end and waste of time, just play along.
lmao,
right, the longer sensative conservatives keep "searching for the bottom" of why crazy people are crazy, instead of distancing themselves from the lunatics,
the more sensible middle stream people go left.
So okay, pretend you think these people are on to something.
I agree wholeheartedly with your take on this. I've been waiting every day to hear what this healthcare system actually entails and I'm not getting any more information than the rest of you. I think people are very frustrated with the lack of information forthcoming from the White House or Congress.
You can't prove that all the people that attend meetings are conservatives, so why are you setting up a straw man? Old people reading the bill currently out there realize that the bill is going to cut half of their medicare, so they are angry about it and want to make it known. I'm not going to deny that there are a decent amount of conservatives out there, but to say that everyone protesting is conservative is impossible to prove. There are still people out there that are racist and will always be there, republican, democrat, or independent, and you can't do anything about that. Also, I want to know your arguments for how our military 'sucks'. What proof do you have to back this claim up?
You believe he won the election based only upon his hard work where no outside factors were involved?
Can you really deny that elections are not bought and paid for these days.
You are right that he worked his way up from being poor, but at some point in that time line he became the political face for something much larger than his self.
My point is that money put him in the presidency. He is now a professional politician. He is not the same person that grew up poor.
I think money certainly has something to do with how well politicians, do because more money means more exposure (and on this same note the media certainly plays a big role in deciding which candidates have a chance in the primaries).
Looking at Obama, however, his original national recognition came from his speech during the 2004 democratic convention.
You then claim that money won him the election, but you fail to specify where the money came from. In this case it came from people sending small donations to fund his campaign. When you think about it, that's actually pretty democratic. He won on money, but that money came from the people.
As far as thinking that he has somehow forgotten about what it's like to be a real person, you seem to have this generalized view of politicians and want to fit every single politician into this generalization.
If you claim that Obama somehow forgot what it's like to be a regular person, then he must have some pretty impressive short term memory (don't forget how young he is for a president).
If you were to actually listen to Obama's speeches, instead of pigeonholing him as a typical politician, you would see that he clearly hasn't forgotten what it's like for the average American. Just look at his policies: he wants to cut taxes for lower and middle class families and raise taxes for those in the highest income bracket. He also wants universal healthcare available to everyone...not just those who can afford it.
Your claims are baseless, and your lack of evidence is revealing as to the weakness of your argument.
Most current/compelling evidence proving Obama to be a "professional politician":
Health care reform legislation is currently the source of much debate.
Passing this legislation has become Obama's top priority yet he has failed to provide anything other than high level ideas of how we wants it to work.
Why has he put so much pressure on congress to pass this legislation quickly? A logical person would believe that if he was genuinely concerned about fixing the problems in health care, which he has accurately identified, he should not rush this process.
He should take the time to address and accurately target each issue so that a more meaningful solution will result.
Obama has not done this. He has openly admitted that he has not read the entire bill. How does he know what he is signing into law if has not read the bill? He doesn't. He only knows what someone else has told him it says. The same argument applies to most likely the majority of those in congress.
The current version of health care reform includes a public option for health insurance. Will Obama and members of congress be on this new public option if the legislation passes? NO! Obama has already publicly stated this. They are public servants! One more point that proves how disconnected these "professional politicians" are from those they serve.
I support the push for health care reform, but I feel that rushing it through congress can only result in costly and ineffective results.
In the military there's a saying: "A good plan now is better than a great plan later." There are many reasons that Obama is rushing to push the healthcare bill through.
He knows that if we continue to stall a number of things will happen:
-People who can't afford healthcare will continue to suffer.
-Small Businesses that can't afford the high costs of healthcare will continue to go under, which will undermine economic recovery
-We spend more than any other industrialized nation on healthcare, and if we hope to recover economically there is no way this can continue
In addition you claim that Obama hasn't read the healthcare bill, but let me ask you this: would you rather have the leader of the U.S. spend his time reading a 1,000 page bill or have one of his aids who is undoubtedly well trained in law to explain to him what is on it?
And if you're concerned about what is on the bill, how about you read it for yourself. It's not like they're hiding it or keeping it a secret. Honestly this is what the media should be doing, in addition to questioning those who are trying to pass the bill. It is the media's job to educate the public, not necessarily the governments. In this country we have a fairly open source government. You can read what is going on during sessions of congress, and usually even see them on tv. Obviously it's asking a lot of the average citizen to research this, but certainly not asking too much of the media.
The members of congress and the president are already on a federal healthcare option...I'm not really sure what you're talking about.
I support the push for health care reform, but I feel that rushing it through congress can only result in costly and ineffective results.
Here's what's cool about our system: if something doesn't work we can always go back and change it. Clearly Obama thinks it would be better to make tweaks to the system later rather then get caught up in a prolonged debate that would likely get us almost no where and allow the uninsured and the economy to suffer in the meantime.
Also, the reason for the debate has very little to do with the actual substance of the bill. That's why you hear these ridiculous accusations like death panels, because those who oppose it don't care about making good arguments, but only scaring people into opposing it by saying that it will destroy America.
To sum up: in no way does any of this prove that Obama falls into your generalization of a "professional politician" (and by the way, turns out you don't need the quotes, he actually is a professional politician).
The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
In the military there's a saying: "A good plan now is better than a great plan later." - Has no bearing. This is not the military, but people's health care and tax money.
-People who can't afford healthcare will continue to suffer.
-Small Businesses that can't afford the high costs of healthcare will continue to go under, which will undermine economic recovery
-Insurance companies that do not want this bill to pass will continue to buy politicians (you would be amazed at how much they donate to political campaigns)
-We spend more than any other industrialized nation on healthcare, and if we hope to recover economically there is no way this can continue
- Do not deny these conditions. They are very true. They are not compelling enough though to warrant a poorly designed health care reform bill that will cost how many more billions than necessary and maybe solve the problem.
would you rather have the leader of the U.S. spend his time reading a 1,000 page bill or have one of his aids who is undoubtedly well trained in law to explain to him what is on it?
- This bill, whether it perfectly addresses the correct issues or not, will cost many billions of taxpayer dollars, and so yes, I do want him to read it. I simply do not care that it is 1018 pages long. The length is the result of an entirely separate issue which does not belong in this debate. If he is indeed as passionate about the bill as he is pushing it through congress, I would think he would care a little bit more about what the actual text says.
And if you're concerned about what is on the bill, how about you read it for yourself. It's not like they're hiding it or keeping it a secret. Honestly this is what the media should be doing, in addition to questioning those who are trying to pass the bill. It is the media's job to educate the public, not necessarily the governments. In this country we have a fairly open source government. You can read what is going on during sessions of congress, and usually even see them on tv. Obviously it's asking a lot of the average citizen to research this, but certainly not asking too much of the media.
-- Absolutely right, yet does not relinquish the need for Obama or any other "professional politician" to read the bill.
The members of congress and the president are already on a public healthcare option...I'm not really sure what you're talking about.
-- Yes they are public servants that have a publicly provided health care option, but you can not lie to yourself by proclaiming that the public option provided by this legislation would be anywhere near the quality of health care that the president and members of congress enjoy. Obama has admitted that he would not use the newly established option.
Here's what's cool about our system: if something doesn't work we can always go back and change it. Clearly Obama thinks it would be better to make tweaks to the system later rather then get caught up in a prolonged debate that would likely get us almost no where and allow the uninsured and the economy to suffer in the meantime.
-- Terrible reasoning here. So you would rather rush to pass legislation that costs more than necessary and also fails to address all of the issues just so that you can come back later and try to fix the problem again while spending even more money. Let us not forget that this is taxpayer money being spent as it is any government spending.
Also, the reason for the debate has very little to do with the actual substance of the bill. That's why you hear these ridiculous accusations like death panels, because those who oppose it don't care about making good arguments, but only scaring people into opposing it by saying that it will destroy America.
-- Read and ignored on the basis of it being a empty rant based solely upon the writer's personal opinion.
Lastly, I will use quotes around the phrase "professional politician" because the quotes refer back to traits, I previously discussed, that I feel characterize my definition of a "professional politician."
I actually agree with this assessment most of the time.
And I believe that, while special interests at one time were absolutely necessary, their influence needs to be curbed in DC.
However, let's give some credit where credit is due.
1. Whether you agree with his policies or not, it is a pretty incredible story. Raised by his grandma, without a dad, on an island in the middle of the Pacific, to the President of the U.S. A bi-racial President, where only a few decades ago interacial marriage was illegal, where his African ancestors would have been slaves only 4 or 5 generations ago.
Okay, that has little to do with your theory he's been bought, but it does bring to light to just how evil the recent (and in some cases not so recent) de-humanization of our President has been.
2. On to your point:
88% of all contributions to his campaign were from individuals, link. Find one recent President who can make this boast.
It seems to me, whether one agrees or disagrees with his policies, that it would be hard to argue that if he has been bought then it was not by the people he represents,
and whether it's the right path or wrong, it's hard to argue his intents are at least not good.
He won this election by a whole whole lot. He didn't steal it, he's not a Nigerian plant, he's not a secret socialist, he's not trying to kill anyone's grandma.
So, instead of vague inuendos about some socialist plot, about a mancherian candidate, how about talking about the fact that we are ranked toward the very bottom of every industrialized nation in every aspect of healthcare, yet we as a whole pay more than twice as much as any other nation for health care.
Clearly everyone here thinks that this statement is false, as evidenced by the sarcastic confession of racism and the adamant denial of the statement. Clearly this is no argument at all.
Hmmm, when Bush had policies out there, people called him every name you could think of. Now that Obama has policies and people are calling him names, you all of the sudden take offense? Give me a break. Allowing Bush bashing but not Obama bashing, right....
That isn't how it works...all our past presidents were white, and were rebellious blacks considered racist? No. I love Obama as much as the next legitimate liberal, but I respect anyone with a solid argument not to support his policies.
