Obama: Enemy of Humanity

[Ziggurat]

So saying that leaving people uninsured is letting them die, and citing a study that shows lack of insurance... causes... death. Poor Alan Grayson.

Grayson is pulling a Godwin, in case you didn't pick it up. And if you DID pick it up and thought that was reasonable, well... I think the conversation is pretty much over then.

 

[Praktik]

Ya I can accept that Grayson went too far - committing a fairly common error unfortunately: sometimes the negatives of certain policy approaches seem so obvious, we assume the proponents of these policies designed them with that aim in mind.

I am certain that no Republican seriously wants Americans to "die quickly" - and even if we were to accept the premise that "dying quickly" is the end result of what particular Republicans may be advocating for in the health reform debate. it takes a certain amount of dehumanization of the other side to draw the conclusion Grayson does. The fact he's standing behind the comment still, and not recognizing this error, is disappointing.

But then again, this is ubiquitous. Did Bush want to extract false confessions from innocents? Did he want Iraqi children to die in his war? Do the voices arguing against military strikes on Iran want a new caliphate and a nuclear apocalypse? Do anti-war activists act consciously in the aid of despots like Saddam?

The answer to all these questions is no. What's happening here is the simple polarization of debate: the common ground of mutual respect is gone, and the other side absorbs the intense feelings an individual has about their given issue. Policy differences turn into battle lines. The people advocating against your position take on all the evils you associate with the outcome - its so obvious after all, how their stance is so horribly wrong, they must be conscioulsy working to that end!

But humans are nothing if not experts at rationalizing. And the people arguing against you just just don't see the same downsides as you. In particularly acute cases, they may be incapable of seeing any downsides to their position at all. So impugning their character and attributing to them the evils you see in their policies misses the mark. And usually just inflames everyone and exacerbates the polarization responsible for beggetting so many of these instances in the first place.

 

[Darth Rotor]

You call it partisanship.

You OP wasn't, nor did I say it was. The OP was an example of political buffoonery. It is the follow "discussion" that took on that other veneer.

As I stated earlier, if this sort of drivel is the best the GOP has to offer (one hopes not, as a competent opposition is neccessary for checks and balances in our system) then Obama will have a cake walk in the public debate, compared to his predecessors in either party.

As noted in other threads, this is a data point of either GOP splitting, self destruction, or possibly going the way of the Whigs.

Maybe your OP title ought to have been "Politican Whigs Out!"

DR

 

[GreyICE]

Grayson is pulling a Godwin, in case you didn't pick it up. And if you DID pick it up and thought that was reasonable, well... I think the conversation is pretty much over then.

The original outburst was unacceptable. The reference to the holocaust was unacceptable. Saying that lack of insurance is killing more people than 9/11 - every single year, without fail - is simply accurate.

I do find it ironic that the most partisan thing (and yes, it was unacceptable) the Democrats have done is polarizing rhetoric. It's horrible, for all the reasons that Praktik outlined, and I agree with him 100% on that issue.

But at the same time we have Bachmann warning of sex clinics and abortions in the schools if we pass this bill.

It's not that I think the Democrats are some sort of saints, or that they don't cross lines, or that they don't have people who fly of the handle. It's that there is literally a fundamental disconnect from reality in the GOP, that I do NOT see mirrored in the Democrats. I don't know how else to put it. It's literally like they're living in some mirror universe when they make statements like this.

So that's what I see as the difference. Even at their rhetorical worst (and I am NOT making excuses for Grayson, my 'poor Alan Grayson' comment was meant to be sarcastic, I'm sorry if that didn't transmit - sarcasm fails on the internet, as I should know by now), Grayson was still anchored to reality.

I can't really say the same for Bachmann. Grayson was grandstanding, in my opinion. I don't approve, like, or in any way tolerate that sort of nonsense, but I can't say he was crazy. Bachmann, despite sounding more reasonable, and with many less Godwins, was... insane, for lack of a better word. Disconnected from reality?

I would love to have a solid, sensible conservative party in this country, because I have a suspicion I would agree with them on lots of issues. But I'm not going to simply operate as if we have one when all evidence I'm seeing says that fundamentally the party has wandered into the wild and wooly.

 

[Praktik]

I would love to have a solid, sensible conservative party in this country, because I have a suspicion I would agree with them on lots of issues. But I'm not going to simply operate as if we have one when all evidence I'm seeing says that fundamentally the party has wandered into the wild and wooly.

Indeed. And I had this on the backburner last night. What happens usually is that when discussing people like Bachmann, someone will bring up a Grayson-type thing "on the other side" and then we're all supposed to throw up our hands and say "it evens out".

As I mentioned above, this type of thinking knows no boundaries. It DOES take two to tango. So yes, some Dems will slip into this common error.

But I have to say - based on my personal experience and judgment, and the wide variety of sources I inform myself with daily, that in my best estimate - this kind of behaviour is more rampant in the modern form of the Republican party than on the Democratic side.

We should not be silly enough to suggest its an exclusively Republican problem (it is a human problem to be sure) - but it would be even more silly to suggest that by some feature of chance American society splits this behaviour evenly down the middle and that it all balances out in the end.

 

[Beerina]

for example


or this


or this


So, Aside from GreyICE's fantasies, it also happened here in reality.

Can't they both be right? We reserve the right to criticize, while such criticism, if it actually "works" and slows or halts the existing president, indeed could be seen, by terrorists, as in their interest?

I don't see why the cold hard reality isn't recognized here. (Some) feminists and arch-religious conservatives both want to outlaw porn. Should they pretend the other doesn't exist, and that the other's success in their area isn't, de facto, their success too?

 

[Upchurch]

Can't they both be right?

I don't understand. How can something both have happened and not have happened?

You know, outside of the quantum scale.

We reserve the right to criticize, while such criticism, if it actually "works" and slows or halts the existing president, indeed could be seen, by terrorists, as in their interest?

I don't see why the cold hard reality isn't recognized here. (Some) feminists and arch-religious conservatives both want to outlaw porn. Should they pretend the other doesn't exist, and that the other's success in their area isn't, de facto, their success too?

Still not following you.

I was providing evidence that what GreyICE was suggesting actually happened. What are you talking about?

 

[cisco]

Did anybody notice this in the comments:

The joke is that if you actually read the Bible, it pretty clearly distinguishes between killing an human being and causing a miscarriage---the former is a potentially a capital crime, even if accidental, the latter is essentially a speeding ticket.

Of course, a lot of these guys never read the Bible, or were so influenced by the leaders who told them how to read it...'solo scriptorum' easily becomes 'solo scriptorum quod pandus quisnam verto atque'---the Bible and the panders who interpret it

What verses is he referring to? And what is the Latin?

 

[GreyICE]

Did anybody notice this in the comments:What verses is he referring to? And what is the Latin?

"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide."

Exodus 21:22

Dunno the latin, knock yourself out. Pretty sure that was overturned per John, but w/e. I don't really care to debate theology, that's so much more the R&P forum.

 

[Marc39]

Obama is the enemy of Obama.

Obama's core campaign issue was healthcare reform.

He becomes president and proceeds to...outsource healthcare to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Obama promises change, but, turns out, 1100 lobbyists were brought in to iron out the healthcare bills.

Obama doesn't even really know what's in the healthcare bills and cannot explan their key ingredients to an increasingly skeptical public.

It is revealed by the Commander in Iraq that Obama has spoken with him personally only once in the past several months.

Obama's stimulus package is promised to keep unemployment at a maximum of 8 percent. Unemployment is now 10 percent.

Obama alienates Israel, the US's only true ally in the Middle East.

Obama and his wife spend $10 million to pitch the US for the Olympics and return utterly defeated and humiliated.

Obama is the friend of the Republicans.

 

[Darth Rotor]

It is revealed by the Commander in Iraq that Obama has spoken with him personally only once in the past several months.

Marc, the chain of command is via Sec Def and General Patreus, the Central Command Commander. I also think you may mean General McCrystal, who is commander in Afghanistan, but I am not sure what news report you are referring to.

It is not necessary for the President to speak to the field commander. If he uses the chain of command by going through the combatant commander, which in this case is General Patreus, he is being far more correct in how the Chain of Command is supposed to work. I would hope that as commander in chief he would respect the use of the chain of command. I expect he got briefed on how it works before he took over.

Obama alienates Israel, the US's only true ally in the Middle East.

That is a flat out lie. Turkey is an ally of long standing in the Middle East. Turkey is also an ally of Israel, in case you hadn't noticed. Their mil to mil contacts have been going on since I was in the Med back in the nineties, as well as joint mil to mil exercises.

DR

 

[Dancing David]

Obama is the enemy of Obama.

Obama's core campaign issue was healthcare reform.

He becomes president and proceeds to...outsource healthcare to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Obama promises change, but, turns out, 1100 lobbyists were brought in to iron out the healthcare bills.

Obama doesn't even really know what's in the healthcare bills and cannot explan their key ingredients to an increasingly skeptical public.

It is revealed by the Commander in Iraq that Obama has spoken with him personally only once in the past several months.

Obama's stimulus package is promised to keep unemployment at a maximum of 8 percent. Unemployment is now 10 percent.

Obama alienates Israel, the US's only true ally in the Middle East.

Obama and his wife spend $10 million to pitch the US for the Olympics and return utterly defeated and humiliated.

Obama is the friend of the Republicans.

Is this like prophecy or something?

How much uncited speculation can you get from a Oujia board.

 

[Marc39]

Marc, the chain of command is via Sec Def and General Patreus, the Central Command Commander. I also think you may mean General McCrystal, who is commander in Afghanistan, but I am not sure what news report you are referring to.

This is the Obama company line hastily concocted by the administration when McChrystal revealed Obama and he have spoken only once.

Chain shmain. Obama should be conferring directly with McChrystal.

Indeed, Obama was forced to meet with McChrystal on Friday, however, the meeting lasted just 25 minutes.

My wife takes longer than 25 minutes for a manicure.

 

[Marc39]

That is a flat out lie. Turkey is an ally of long standing in the Middle East. Turkey is also an ally of Israel, in case you hadn't noticed. Their mil to mil contacts have been going on since I was in the Med back in the nineties, as well as joint mil to mil exercises.

Turkey is not nearly the close ally of the US as Israel has been.

Get your facts in order.

 

[Darth Rotor]

This is the Obama company line hastily concocted by the administration when McChrystal revealed Obama and he have spoken only once.

Chain shmain. Obama should be conferring directly with McChrystal.

Indeed, Obama was forced to meet with McChrystal on Friday, however, the meeting lasted just 25 minutes.

My wife takes longer than 25 minutes for a manicure.

No, Marc, it is how the military is supposed to work, in the United States of America. The penchant for micro management that LBJ got started, and that a number of his successors have engaged in, is one of the great failures of the civil/military relationship established in the 1947 Defense Reorganization act.

Your characterization of this as "an Obama cop out" is a screaming lie, just as "a Clinton general" slur leveled at Anthony Zinni was a screaming lie.

You are being a complete ignoramous.

I for one would hope that the president would rarely bypass the chain of command, with the exception being unusual circumstances where critical decisions are afoot. What is going on now with decisions on troop level increases are precisely that, critical strategic decisions.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

Turkey is not nearly the close ally of the US as Israel has been.

Get your facts in order.

Look, my failing to learn from his own mistakes friend, you claimed that Israel, the US's only true ally in the Middle East.

That is a bald faced lie. They are an ally. No question.

DR

 

[Marc39]

No, Marc, it is how the military is supposed to work, in the United States of America.

Obama has been roundly excoriated for not having had greater personal interaction with McChrystal.

Sadly, your insights are nothing more than horse hockey.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Obama has been roundly excoriated for not having had greater personal interaction with McChrystal.

Incorrectly so.

The criticism is empty headed tongue wagging. Glad you are able to realize that Afghanistan is not Iraq, we have hope for you.

DR

 

[Marc39]

Look, my failing to learn from his own mistakes friend, you claimed that Israel, the US's only true ally in the Middle East.

That is a bald faced lie. They are an ally. No question.

DR

Turkey is not a true ally. A true ally would not have denied US troops deployment in its territory in the Iraq war.

Turkey views the Iraq war as a threat as northern Iraq has been a safe-haven for the PKK.

Turkey, according to public opinion surveys, has also been of the most anti-American countries in the world, if not the most anti-American .

Please, get your facts in order.

 

[Thunder]

Turkey is not a true ally. A true ally would not have denied US troops deployment in its territory in the Iraq war. .

a true ally would not have attacked an American ship in 1967, and sent Jonathan Pollard and other spies against us in the 1980s.

Israel is only an "ally" of convenience. The day America stops doing their bidding and allowing their illegal settlements, Israel will call the USA "Nazis", "Arab-lovers", and "anti-Semites".