why the health care bill is a monstrosity: 1. total page number is almost 2,000! The eaermarks in that thing must be a mile long! And if those aren't earmarks, then we're doomed.
2. It contains all sorts of favors to various companies and unions
3. It does not contain sane reforms that might upset the tort lawyers.
11/8/2009 #2 ReportThere definately should've been more public input.
You wanna upset tort lawyers?
11/8/2009 #3 ReportWell, what annoys me is that in a so-called democratic society the law is supposed to reflect the views of the majority of the people - but it just doesn't. The abortion bill that was passed a year ago here in Victoria was a contentious issue in which the law passed WITHOUT the consent of the majority of the people - the media misrepresented the cause of the pro-life groups completely. And because I'm a pro-lifer, it got me very angry. *sulks*
Sorry, that was a bit of a rant that was brought up by the word 'bill'. Don't get me started on legislation.
11/8/2009 #4 ReportYou wanna upset tort lawyers?
I wanna do something that makes most of 'em go out and work for a living.
to Araloth: that happens in the USA all the time. We think Roe v. Wade may soon be reversed though. And when that happens I'm gonna party like its 1899.
Pro-life fist-bumps?
11/8/2009 #5 ReportRight. Please excuse my ignorance. And I am in complete agreement.
11/8/2009 #8 ReportWell politics aren't really my thing but I love Obama and I know a few other things but yep that pretty much concludes my political knowledge. (steps back and lets the adults or people who know what they're talking about have at it)
1/28/2010 #11 ReportI don't know that much about politics either, but I don't like Obama as you probably do.
*cough*affirmative action*cough*
1/28/2010 . Edited 1/28/2010 #12 Report(cough) Goes back on campaign promises so hard I think they're going to bite him in the rear (cough)
He is possibly feeling his way towards foreign policy sanity--if he would listen less to Pelosi, Boxer, Waxman, Frank, et al.
Domestically--ha! No chance.
1/28/2010 #13 ReportIt's more complicated than you think, probably. If I remember correctly, in history, all the rulers seem to be in charge but they have to bow down to the wishes of those who back them (i.e. the upper classes). I have a feeling that some of those people are making life difficult for Obama. Maybe I'm a bit too much of a conspiracy theorist but that's what's always happened in history. Moreover, people expected way too much of him. He's only human. At least he seems to be trying to work, which is more than you can say for our prime minister, who's done nothing since being elected except give himself a pay rise.
1/28/2010 #14 ReportSpeaking of leaders, I can't actually say whether Kevin Rudd is a dodgy prime minister or not. He got voted in mostly because of John Howard's industrial relations laws (not to mention, the GST that's been in place since 2000). Like other political leaders in our time Kev has to deal with the global financial crisis, and economic policy is never easy. But I can say that government handouts, such as last year's 42 million, can only fix things short-term, and that's only if everyone actually spends the money. Seeing as most of the populace who were eligible for the handout either used it to pay bills or stashed it somewhere for savings, I think I can safely say that it's failed to do much for the Australian economy.
At least he seems to be trying to work, which is more than you can say for our prime minister, who's done nothing since being elected except give himself a pay rise.
That's true.
1/28/2010 #15 Report(cough) Goes back on campaign promises so hard I think they're going to bite him in the rear (cough)
They already HAVE *cough* Massachusetts*cough*
1/28/2010 #16 Report(snickering like crazy) Wow you guys must really have a lot of allergies. To each their own I guess.
1/29/2010 #17 ReportThat new senator posed nude for Cosmopolitan and won the Sexiest Man award.
1/29/2010 #19 ReportThat new senator posed nude for Cosmopolitan and won the Sexiest Man award.
Yea, 20 years ago when he was in college. Probably won him votes actually... ;P
1/29/2010 #20 Reportto Ara: Indeed.
They already HAVE *cough* Massachusetts*cough
I'm thinking really hard--like 1994. Except better.
1/31/2010 #21 ReportI've noticed that there's been a bit of political stuff being tossed around in the forum, but nobody ever seems to use this thread. Why?
5/8/2010 #22 ReportEh, probably because everyone forgets that there's a political thread and in our typical off-topic fashion we end up discussing political stuff in the other threads.
Para! You have a new little dude next to your name! =D
5/10/2010 #23 ReportOh, and I swear I didn't mean to go off-topic with that last one. :P
5/10/2010 #24 Reporttransplanted from chat thread:
but a lot of times it seems like they think freedom of religion means freedom from religion.
Umm... Milhist... you are aware that the constitution protects both.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. That ring a bell?
Does this need to head into politics thread?
I wasn't referring to freedom from a state run religion (an abomination indeed). No duh that that freedom is in the Constitution. I refer to freedom from people practicing their religion (gasp) in public. It seems like there's a problem there.
6/10/2010 #25 ReportBut they can practice religion is public... it just can't interfere with other people. The Supreme Court (Souter- writing for majority) concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion." So technically...
A specific example you are P.Oed about? What kind of thing are you referring to?
6/10/2010 #26 ReportOkay, so I know no one has been on here for almost a year, but did anyone else see the Republican representative debate last night? Two of the the candidates got into a huge shouting match!
10/19/2011 #28 Report Reply 
Follow