I don't know why you posted that video @shinyblurry as the video contradicts your point. There is no dismantling of the AHA (grow up and call it by it's proper name you fucking child) Ryan agreed there needs to be reform and he appears to have put forth some legitimate concerns. But there is no dismantling, If he wants to fix parts of AHA, then more power to him

My point was to contradict your claim that Paul Ryan is a "Sarah Palin lite". Yes, he did dismantle a primary rationale behind Obamacare which is that health care reform is budget reform. Ryan clearly demonstrated that it is exactly the opposite as Obamacare uses shady accounting practices and steals nearly a trillion dollars from Medicare to fund itself. It is a disaster for our budget, creating another gigantic government entitlement when we can't afford the ones we have.

Healthcare should not be a for-profit system. Gov't has a vested interest in keeping its citizens healthy and happy. It's one thing to take care of our doctors and reward them for their service and knowledge. It's another to make them and the insurance companies obscenely wealthy at the cost of our well-being.

We are both agreed that the system as it is is broken and needs reforming. We are disagreeing that bigger government is the answer.

Funny how your video conveniently cuts off Obama's response. Too afraid of the opposition I see.

The video had nothing to do with the argument, only to counter your point that Paul Ryan is some sort of intellectual light weight.

Dismantling AHA is going backwards. AHA is here. Deal with it, you and your Insurance lobbyist pals lost. You have some legitimate concerns? Great..awesome. I know some Republicans who have actual rational concerns and they ought to be addressed so you don't even have united support against the AHA even in your own ranks. Republicans don't fall in line with your warped ideology anymore. And when Romney loses in November I hope the adults of your party take it back from the mental midgets who refuse to have an adult conversation and bet against this nation.

I'm an independent and I don't endorse everything the republican party does. They agree more with my values since the far left took over the democratic party, but I have actually supported democrats, both locally and nationally, in the past.

If you think Obamas re-election is in the bag then you are in denial of reality. Obama is showing some very poor numbers in many polls, and if he does win, it will be by the skin of his teeth.

Ryan wants to gut medicare. Thanks for gift-wrapping Florida for Obama.

Romney has gone public with the fact that he isn't necessarily embracing all of the elements of the Ryan plan, but will introduce his own plan. That includes medicare:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/internal-talking-points-romney-will-push-his-own-budget-proposalnot-paul-ryans-plan/




>> ^VoodooV

I don't know why you posted that video @shinyblurry as the video contradicts your point. There is no dismantling of the AHA (grow up and call it by it's proper name you fucking child) Ryan agreed there needs to be reform and he appears to have put forth some legitimate concerns. But there is no dismantling, If he wants to fix parts of AHA, then more power to him.

Healthcare should not be a for-profit system. Gov't has a vested interest in keeping its citizens healthy and happy. It's one thing to take care of our doctors and reward them for their service and knowledge. It's another to make them and the insurance companies obscenely wealthy at the cost of our well-being.

Funny how your video conveniently cuts off Obama's response. Too afraid of the opposition I see.

Dismantling AHA is going backwards. AHA is here. Deal with it, you and your Insurance lobbyist pals lost. You have some legitimate concerns? Great..awesome. I know some Republicans who have actual rational concerns and they ought to be addressed so you don't even have united support against the AHA even in your own ranks. Republicans don't fall in line with your warped ideology anymore. And when Romney loses in November I hope the adults of your party take it back from the mental midgets who refuse to have an adult conversation and bet against this nation.

Ryan wants to gut medicare. Thanks for gift-wrapping Florida for Obama.

For fear of getting shot or angering "People with guns," no one will/can stand up for gun con control.

Gun Lobbyists have cash.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^criticalthud:
government really only reflects the mindset of the people.
we're stupid, so we have a stupid government.
but the older generations are REALLY stupid, and they're dying off. so there is reason to be optimistic.

Really? I'm not so sure. I think they were less enlightened, certainly, but what are we doing to prove we're less stupid?>> ^petpeeved:
I may be a simpleton but there really does seem to be a silver bullet to the mess we're in: remove the money incentive from national politics completely, starting with evicting all the lobbyists from Washington, and gutting the amount of money that flows into the political campaign warchests every election.
While I think that's a great idea, I'm very wary of the term "silver bullet". Fact is, that life is complex, and rarely has simple solutions. Economics and politics are an intricate interlocked system. Pulling on one thread alone never works.


there positives and negatives to be sure.
but overall for the species, the introduction of the internet allows a greater flow of information. This both increases overall awareness and allows for new associations to be drawn between bits of information. The overall effect is a palpable positive for intelligence, which despite our misplaced reliance on standardized testing, is heavily dependent on both awareness and the ability to create information associations based on logical connections.

The over 60 crowd is from a different era of both energy availability and access to information.
so i say, be a little patient. our timeline is much more instant - we demand instant change without necessarily being aware of how the tendencies of the species is changing . but in terms of evolution, we are changing rapidly, and the greatest catalyst, global/planet change, is just starting to take hold.

>> ^criticalthud:

government really only reflects the mindset of the people.
we're stupid, so we have a stupid government.
but the older generations are REALLY stupid, and they're dying off. so there is reason to be optimistic.


Really? I'm not so sure. I think they were less enlightened, certainly, but what are we doing to prove we're less stupid?>> ^petpeeved:

I may be a simpleton but there really does seem to be a silver bullet to the mess we're in: remove the money incentive from national politics completely, starting with evicting all the lobbyists from Washington, and gutting the amount of money that flows into the political campaign warchests every election.

While I think that's a great idea, I'm very wary of the term "silver bullet". Fact is, that life is complex, and rarely has simple solutions. Economics and politics are an intricate interlocked system. Pulling on one thread alone never works.

These people aren't "participating in the system" because said participation requires great wealth. Those with great wealth have no interest in such an agenda.

Conversely, the Tea Party was an inadvertently pro-corporate movement quietly backed by millions of corporate dollars. That is why it worked. Ever seen footage of police quelling a Tea Party rally? There is no equivalency between the Tea Party and the Occupy movement.


>> ^Darkhand:

I don't disagree with anything that you've said. I think you are misunderstanding my point.
The problem is from what I have seen the people trying to enact change don't actually participate in the system. So other than marching, and banging on drums, and protesting they aren't actually accomplishing anything.
The Tea Party might not be the most successful group but it sure as hell worked in a lot of their endeavors. I haven't seen the Liberal Version of the tea party yet and I don't think I will.
>> ^petpeeved:
>> ^Darkhand:
>> ^petpeeved:
The revolution will not have a permit.

There will never be a revolution because the only people who seem to be upset about anything are hippies and hippies are non-violent.
Occupy Wall Street was the biggest let down because when asked if they planned on sponsoring any political parties they said "we don't recognize the system so we don't sponsor anyone" or some shit like that.
Unless this "revolution" is going to burn our current system to the ground, or actually get involved in politics nothing will happen.
Feel free to shout and bang your drums if it makes you feel better. But that's not a revolution it's just a mosquito buzzing in the ear of our capitalist government.

You seem to think that only violence can change the system at this point? I honestly don't know if there is any hope of reforming the government via policy and procedure but I doubt violence would change anything for the better either.
I may be a simpleton but there really does seem to be a silver bullet to the mess we're in: remove the money incentive from national politics completely, starting with evicting all the lobbyists from Washington, and gutting the amount of money that flows into the political campaign warchests every election.
If there is one thing we should socialize, it's the political process itself. We have spending caps on pro sports teams; we should have spending caps on political campaigns as well. Give all the major candidates free television and media coverage during the election season. Eliminate corporate contributions entirely etc.
We just need to turn politics into a job that attracts people for the right reason: public service, as opposed to the reason most seem to get involved these days: personal aggrandizement.
Romney's fundraisers are aiming to raise a billion dollars to win this election. I'm sure Obama's are aiming for as close to that figure as possible too.
This is the root of all the problems we face as a nation, imo. It's all about the money needed to buy an election.

I don't disagree with anything that you've said. I think you are misunderstanding my point.

The problem is from what I have seen the people trying to enact change don't actually participate in the system. So other than marching, and banging on drums, and protesting they aren't actually accomplishing anything.

The Tea Party might not be the most successful group but it sure as hell worked in a lot of their endeavors. I haven't seen the Liberal Version of the tea party yet and I don't think I will.

>> ^petpeeved:

>> ^Darkhand:
>> ^petpeeved:
The revolution will not have a permit.

There will never be a revolution because the only people who seem to be upset about anything are hippies and hippies are non-violent.
Occupy Wall Street was the biggest let down because when asked if they planned on sponsoring any political parties they said "we don't recognize the system so we don't sponsor anyone" or some shit like that.
Unless this "revolution" is going to burn our current system to the ground, or actually get involved in politics nothing will happen.
Feel free to shout and bang your drums if it makes you feel better. But that's not a revolution it's just a mosquito buzzing in the ear of our capitalist government.

You seem to think that only violence can change the system at this point? I honestly don't know if there is any hope of reforming the government via policy and procedure but I doubt violence would change anything for the better either.
I may be a simpleton but there really does seem to be a silver bullet to the mess we're in: remove the money incentive from national politics completely, starting with evicting all the lobbyists from Washington, and gutting the amount of money that flows into the political campaign warchests every election.
If there is one thing we should socialize, it's the political process itself. We have spending caps on pro sports teams; we should have spending caps on political campaigns as well. Give all the major candidates free television and media coverage during the election season. Eliminate corporate contributions entirely etc.
We just need to turn politics into a job that attracts people for the right reason: public service, as opposed to the reason most seem to get involved these days: personal aggrandizement.
Romney's fundraisers are aiming to raise a billion dollars to win this election. I'm sure Obama's are aiming for as close to that figure as possible too.
This is the root of all the problems we face as a nation, imo. It's all about the money needed to buy an election.

>> ^Darkhand:

>> ^petpeeved:
The revolution will not have a permit.

There will never be a revolution because the only people who seem to be upset about anything are hippies and hippies are non-violent.
Occupy Wall Street was the biggest let down because when asked if they planned on sponsoring any political parties they said "we don't recognize the system so we don't sponsor anyone" or some shit like that.
Unless this "revolution" is going to burn our current system to the ground, or actually get involved in politics nothing will happen.
Feel free to shout and bang your drums if it makes you feel better. But that's not a revolution it's just a mosquito buzzing in the ear of our capitalist government.


You seem to think that only violence can change the system at this point? I honestly don't know if there is any hope of reforming the government via policy and procedure but I doubt violence would change anything for the better either.

I may be a simpleton but there really does seem to be a silver bullet to the mess we're in: remove the money incentive from national politics completely, starting with evicting all the lobbyists from Washington, and gutting the amount of money that flows into the political campaign warchests every election.

If there is one thing we should socialize, it's the political process itself. We have spending caps on pro sports teams; we should have spending caps on political campaigns as well. Give all the major candidates free television and media coverage during the election season. Eliminate corporate contributions entirely etc.

We just need to turn politics into a job that attracts people for the right reason: public service, as opposed to the reason most seem to get involved these days: personal aggrandizement.

Romney's fundraisers are aiming to raise a billion dollars to win this election. I'm sure Obama's are aiming for as close to that figure as possible too.

This is the root of all the problems we face as a nation, imo. It's all about the money needed to buy an election.

@kevingrr

I understand times are tight. That's bankers being responsible, whether voluntarily or at the government's request. They were broke and need to rein in the lending. Tighter standards means it's expected that projects once referred to as "good" are no longer viewed that way. It's tough, but you adapt. If everything is right with the deal, someone will finance. Where there is profit, there is a businessman.

I feel for the laid off construction workers, but frankly there was a bubble. We have HUGE housing developments that are sitting empty and going for 40k a house. We have a glut of empty shopping malls. We don't need more right now. If there is construction to be done right now I firmly believe it is public infrastructure investment we need. Rail, road, bridges, power, etc. That'll put people back to work.

Jamie Dimon has a good rolodex. In todays world, being a good banker means being a good insider trader, and lobbyist. I have about zero patience for their manipulation of our democracy let alone our markets.

@lantern53

Hi, old grumpy dude.

1.)
Do you enjoy social security benefits yet? Medicare mayhaps?

You're a socialist.

[I guarantee you would never turn down a social security check if they suddenly arrived in your mail.]

2.)
Congress and congressional lobbyists have the majority of power over policy.

Big business controls the Congress and the Lobbyist. Therefore, Big Business has the majority of power over government policies that affect our lives. i.e. stagant wages; unstable food, housing, and energy; endless war

The President is just a placeholder.

Obama and Romney are just masks for Oligarchs to hide behind.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'private, prison, Fareed, Zakaria, failed, war on drugs, corrupt, lobbyists' to 'private, prison, Fareed Zakaria, failed, war on drugs, corrupt, lobbyists' - edited by xxovercastxx

the private prison lobby has quietly become the 9th largest lobbyist.
the outcomes should really be no surprise to those paying attention.sadly most people are not paying attention.

Sure he would. This whole video is him speculating that Carolyn Maloney will be the Democratic Party's ranking member in the finance committee, because that's who the banksters want.

And then he spends 5 minutes crowing about how right he is because an article got published in a newspaper that pretty clearly indicated banksters like her. So what? Only crazy Republicans think the newspapers work for the Democratic party.

Plus, every quote he took from the article was sourced to someone on Wall Street's side. Where's a source from, say, someone in the Democratic party who's part of the decision-making process? Nowhere to be found in Cenk's piece. But, in the article he's sourcing all this from, there's this:

“For Nancy Pelosi, Maxine is a three-fer,” said one congressional staffer, noting that it will be Ms. Pelosi who ultimately makes the determination if Democrats retake control. “She is a fellow Californian, she is an African-American woman, and it is her turn.”

And this:

“A lot of folks in the CBC [Congressional Black Caucus] would not look too kindly on an outside challenge,” said one Capitol Hill lobbyist. “They want to go back to the seniority system.”

And this:

For her part, Ms. Waters seems confident her long service will carry her through. “Let me let you in on a secret: I am the senior-most person serving on the Financial Services Committee,” she told the 2012 California State Democratic Convention last month. “Barney Frank is about to retire, and guess who’s shaking in their boots? The too-big-to-fail banks and financial institutions and all of Wall Street because Maxine Waters is going to be the next chair of the Financial Services Committee.”

Oh, so Nancy Pelosi, the CBC, and Maxine herself all think she's a lock? Well, that would kinda undercut Cenk's anti-Democratic spin, so he doesn't mention any of that.

Cenk's whole show seemed to just be a vehicle for bashing Democrats, often for things they aren't actually guilty of doing. Like...this whole thing about Carolyn Maloney, which is 100% speculation!

At this point he honestly seems to me like some sort of Karl Rove creation designed to depress Democratic turnout and liberal activism.

>> ^messenger:

Cenk would only say that Waters had sold out to the banks if it were demonstrably true. He's big on backing up his statements with facts. He would never just speculate that she "must have" sold out.

@NetRunner

Who cares if you agree by accident, as long as you agree?

Who cares if the EPA is abolished, if it's filled with Ex-Monsanto Execs and Lobbyists who make it impotent anyway?

The system is broken and needs a reboot. Why are you gonna try to limp along 'til a better match than Ron Paul appears. It just won't happen in this decade.

You keep acting as if your "Vote Democrat" worldview will result in some slow but steady march into Ameritopia.
[Nevermind, the fact that "Democrats" like Obama are center-right to begin with and too timid to propose ultra-left policies even with Democratic Majority.]

It simply can't happen. The system currently does not function how it was advertised.
~~

Plain and simple. Does a person or business have the right to refuse service?

If so, you've legitimized discrimination. If not, you're forcing your will upon others.

Both are relatively wrong. But which is worse? Do civil rights trump natural rights?

Moreover, the entire point I'm getting at is: Ron Paul wants to decentralize power i.e. GIVE YOU MOAR POWER!

Another blaring point you refuse to comprehend or admit, even if Ron Paul overturns 100 years of law [which he wouldn't be able to] YOU now have the power to construct BETTER policies.

Create your own EPA and FDA with more strict standards. Create your own business park that has anti-discriminatory policies. This is the true essence of Democracy and Self-Governance combined.

Or.. you can keep being Obama's bitch boy.

For some reason, I think you'll choose the latter.

>> ^ghark:

@NetRunner Err, so what was the point of posting a video that bashes the GOP for taking lobbyist money for supporting a "risky, dirty pipeline" if you yourself support the pipeline?
answer that for me and i'll respond to your other points


I'm pretty ambivalent about Keystone XL, mostly. The point of posting a video bashing the GOP is to keep reminding people that they're whores for corporations first and foremost, and that their ideology is mostly just a cover story to excuse that.

I don't know the minds of the pro-XL Democrats, but some non-zero number of them are probably corporate whores as well. But some are thinking along the same lines as I am. Or their objections to Keystone were based on the route it took, not to the existence of the project itself. Or they're actually opposed to it.

Republicans are universally for it, because they think environmental concerns are ridiculous. Or at least that's what they say in public when asked.

I don't really know whether I'm for or against Keystone XL, but I know I'm against that.