I am not happy with his stance on the borders. They need to be secured…PRONTO!
Donnie…
[quote]PtrDR wrote:
I am not happy with his stance on the borders. They need to be secured…PRONTO!
Donnie…[/quote]
I agree.
The political advantages of the current policy could lead to some disastrous results!
I was just thinking about this earlier today, not about the pres but about the Texas gov. My wife and I were talking about the next race and I blurted out " I want to punch Rick Perry in the face…". I may or may not want to actually do that but I have been VERY unhappy with him (too much to go into here), but the sad thing is that if he wins the primary I’ll still vote for him.
As for McCain, mark my words…I will never vote for anyone who voted for (or sponsored ) McCain-Feingold. I know that money is a problem and lobbyists are a problem but it violates the freakin first amendment. Not only is it unconstitutional but it didn’t even work (527s anyone). So it is both a bad and a stupid law.
I still want to see a flat tax plan with specifics…There are plenty of poor people in this country that don’t pay income tax, would they have to pay into the flat tax? Also a national sales tax and a value added tax seem like terrible ideas.
BB wrote: McCain is probably too old too – seriously, he’s pretty old, and his time as a POW isn’t making him feel any younger. The man was born August 29, 1936 – I believe he would be older in 2008 than Reagan was when he was sworn in for his first term.
Don’t forget Guiiani, and I don’t think McCain would be too old. Four of our Supremee Court Justices are older and two were born the same year, no one is making an issue of their age. Granted they are obviously not at the President’s level but they are powerful and are determining the country’s laws.
Would I be out of line to ask for some more specifics concerning what Bush is seen to be doing wrong?
I mean, is it just the way government is run in general, or the fact that it is still being run that way while Bush is in charge?
[quote]vroom wrote:
Would I be out of line to ask for some more specifics concerning what Bush is seen to be doing wrong?
I mean, is it just the way government is run in general, or the fact that it is still being run that way while Bush is in charge?[/quote]
I want real change vroom! I’m not the sort who is happy with the status quo just because my life happens to be going along fine. We have some serious problems in this country: Social Security, taxes, terrorism, The environment, energy etc.
What do you think of the gas prices? I know that the President (any President) cannot directly effect gas prices, but they can lead the way to develop alternative fuel sources. Why is there no push in that direction?
President Bush seems to be addressing some of these things (with little cooperation from the other side), but there are some things that have not even been addressed!
I do think that he is well intended, but a “Jefferson Smith” he’s not!
I’m not at all happy with bush.
Zeb, thanks for the response, I appreciate it.
[quote]SicTorn wrote:
I’m not at all happy with bush.[/quote]
What’s wrong with your bush?
As far as President Bush the major issue in this country right now, as I see, Is health care. Why are we not focusing as a country on this topic.
Social Security is a problem definately–for the future. Health care is NOW.
As more and more Americans lose their jobs and ability to afford proper medical care, we worry about issues far less reaching and much less encompassing.
We need a leader who is comitted to seeing some change through. I honestly thought more would get done under Clinton, it did not.
And quite frankly I’m disappointed Bush did not pick up the torch and guide this country into better times wrt our nations health care system.
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
SicTorn wrote:
I’m not at all happy with bush.
What’s wrong with your bush?
[/quote]
Didn’t say I didn’t like mine.
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
And quite frankly I’m disappointed Bush did not pick up the torch and guide this country into better times wrt our nations health care system.[/quote]
Don’t get too ruffled there squatch. There’s only so much any president can do about insurance rules. Being in those trenches myself, I would have to say that the major problem that interferes with me getting my job done and compensated FAIRLY (some of the things we charge an arm and a leg for are just unbelievably cheap) lies with how insurance companies work, and how they interact with doctors and vice versa.
If you don’t have medical insurance, you are paying the same prices (or sometimes more) as Medicare or HMOs/PPOs, and it is going to be too much, let me tell you. You see, the insurance companies tell us how much we can charge for a certain product or procedure, and that’s how much we charge for it in most cases. It has NOTHING to do with how much it costs for us to produce said service or product, and it has NOTHING to do with free market principles or anything good like what we founded our economy on.
Example: Most of the young girls that come in on my shift complain of abdominal pain. They get a pregnancy test 100% of the time in these cases, and they are billed (let’s say) $45 dollars for it. The kit I use to do the actual test costs less than a dollar in bulk, and can be found in almost any drugstore for however much Eckerd’s charges – it sure as hell ain’t 45 bucks. If you have insurance, the company pays for it or most of it, and you don’t even notice the gouging by the hospital or the insurance company on your premiums to cover the gouging.
And this entirely legal acceptable practice, and it’s friggin unAmerican dammit. Where’s the competition here? It’s in the insurance companies competing for your premiums. After that, once they got you, they just hold you down and… you get the picture.
I wish somebody would fix this crap. I seriously doubt any president could do much by himself/herself. Something else has got to happen first. Something’s going to have to break.
Very well stated lothario!
lothario
I recognize what you are saying as truth, but that doesn’t mean that with some pressure and attention from the President and those inpower that reform could not take place.
In truth what can the President alone do about anything.
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
lothario
I recognize what you are saying as truth, but that doesn’t mean that with some pressure and attention from the President and those inpower that reform could not take place.
In truth what can the President alone do about anything.[/quote]
You bring up an excellent point sasquatch. First and foremost the President has to use the “bully pulpit” to his advantage. I don’t think George Bush has done a very good job of this overall. While he may not have direct authority over various circles of influence, he does have the capacity as President of the United States to speak out and rally people to a worthy cause. For example he did an excellent job after the attack on the twin towers! He spoke with passion and the people heard and followed, at least for a while.
I think Ronald Reagan did this as well as any President in recent history. I think President Bush would do well to copy the Gipper on this particular thing.
Zeb,
As you know, I’ve been a fellow advocate of W. using the press to his advantage.
Apparently, he’s quite “impressive” in person (see Jane Fonda).
However, it is very amusing to watch liberal outlets wither and die because they no longer have the Presidential ear (CNN).
It is amusing to watch the President clip the wings of the press. They have been rabid and have an inflated opinion of themselves since Watergate.
He just keeps rolling along. Remember, W. “has no coattails.” See pickups in 2002.
“The Republicans can’t win with an increased voter turnout.” See 2004.
“The Iraqi elections won’t happen. If they do, they will be a disaster.” See 2005.
I’m having fun!!!
JeffR
Fuck it, I was thinking about running in 2008. Would I get any votes here??? RLTW
rangertab75
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Zeb,
As you know, I’ve been a fellow advocate of W. using the press to his advantage.
Apparently, he’s quite “impressive” in person (see Jane Fonda).
However, it is very amusing to watch liberal outlets wither and die because they no longer have the Presidential ear (CNN).
It is amusing to watch the President clip the wings of the press. They have been rabid and have an inflated opinion of themselves since Watergate.
He just keeps rolling along. Remember, W. “has no coattails.” See pickups in 2002.
“The Republicans can’t win with an increased voter turnout.” See 2004.
“The Iraqi elections won’t happen. If they do, they will be a disaster.” See 2005.
I’m having fun!!!
JeffR[/quote]
Jeff, I met President Bush in person on one occasion, before he was actually President, and found him to be very charismatic. I don’t think that quality shows up on television all that well.
You are exactly right with your analysis of the liberal media outlets! They have gotten it wrong so many times that the credibility of the liberal media is pretty much shot. Perhaps that’s the reason why conservative radio is doing so well.
The most amusing part is how they get an acute case of amnesia after they are proven to be wrong. They won’t discuss all of the tihngs they predicted, but did not happen.
Funny stuff!
Great post, Zeb!
I have to say that on the NATIONAL level, the last person I voted “for” was Perot…but that election also taught me that America “talks and screams” about wanting change…but that the National Political “Machine” just isn’t set up for it…
This last election had me voting for Dubya for one reason only…he needed to finish up the mess he had gotten our troops into in Iraq…
Mufasa
By the way…I’m with the Camp that feels whether our Iraq policy is “right” or “wrong” will be defined retroprectively and through the Prism of History…
I NEVER thought that it was going to be a “quick fix”…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Great post, Zeb!
I have to say that on the NATIONAL level, the last person I voted “for” was Perot…but that election also taught me that America “talks and screams” about wanting change…but that the National Political “Machine” just isn’t set up for it…
This last election had me voting for Dubya for one reason only…he needed to finish up the mess he had gotten our troops into in Iraq…
Mufasa[/quote]
I wonder what would happen if we had a multitude of political parties (not quite like Europe)? Each one as powerful, or powerless as the next. Would there be chaos, or great success?
I think that’s the only way that a “Jefferson Smith” could reach the highest office in the land.
What do you think?
Zeb