Interesting topic William and particularly applicable for the 4th of July. I have my own views of Sam Adams and William and the Tea Party views are certainly at variance with mainstream America and probably mine as well! I think most outsiders who study your history treat Adams as nothing more than a carbuncle on the arse or a revolution. A bomb maker who with skilful oratory and dogged determination forged for himself a place in history greater than his worth. I compare Adams to Patrick Henry, less well known outside the US than is Adams but who surely had a far greater claim to fame in the struggles of those early years. I welcome comments (good and bad) as so much of what I claim to believe comes from readers here and elsewhere who exchange ideas. Adams of course never accepted an idea which was at variance with his own monocular dogma. To you all, a happy and successful 4th of July. Cheers from Aussie
I guess what always kind of amazes me is the cult like status that is given to these men coupled with a belief that we must not decide anything for ourselves in 2014 without first trying to make it square with what we believe the founding fathers would have done. As if to say that nothing of philosophical consequence occurred before they decided to take the country away from the Indians while building it with slaves from elsewhere in the world, and also that nothing created by the puny minds since then has risen to any level high enough to be considered equally worthy.
In their day, they claimed independence from a belief that some fool, by luck of birth, should be given the proclamation to rule others. It's always been about power, nothing more, nothing less. Admirable as it was they spread that power out a little further, they clearly had limits in mind for how far they were willing to spread that power. Times changed, and we decided to spread it further. Some believe the universe is expanding like a rubber band that will eventually snap back to it's original shape and size. The conservatives in this country, IMO, want to see this exact phenomenon happen to our society. After consciously choosing to unwind slavery and exclusion of women, we are now headed back from whence we came. In the years of WW II, we truly backed freedom from tyranny. Now, we are mostly trying to protect our empire.
No William, I don't hate America. What I dislike are ideologues who resort to stupid comments like yours whenever you have nothing to say. You are quite proud of the FF's, Reagan, and your Tea Party and in you insecurity, you are not able to accept so much as an ounce of honest criticism. You are part of the "My country first and always, right or wrong". You worship capitalist types, yet, you seemingly cannot understand the concept that everything action and item of consumption has a cost.
Yeah and your hero Billy Ayers doesn't hate America either.
No one's saying you shouldn't think and decide for yourself. You exaggerate absolute everything you disagree with. Your thoughts honestly pale in comparison with the FF's.
You of course believe in socialism, apologizing only when you posit that the wrong people are running things.
Happy 4th Max. Even you are allowed to pursue your happiness.
So much of what you say Max is correct. Conversely so much is also, in my humble opinion, incorrect. It has long intrigued me to see the reverence which is paid to the constitution and the Bill of Rights. So much so that the constitution is such an important aspect of the presidential oath. This as you say, appears to stem from the founders who sit atop the mountain called worship, from this lofty edifice they are accorded ever growing adulation and recognition of their wisdom. After so long studying the early history, I am truly amazed that a group of men could simultaneously come together in a time when such a group was needed to progress a threadbare colony into nationhood. Virginia produced four of the first five presidents and many others in the political scene hailed from the same state.Wythe, as a friend and colleague of Jefferson had great influence. These men deserve the honour and respect you still pay them; they would also be the first to agree that times having changed, the constitution needs to change to reflect those changes. I cannot agree that America is trying to protect her empire. Trying perhaps to protect her interests but with all the faults, your country has never been an empire builder; James Munroe curtailed expansionism for the two centuries that really mattered. Perhaps there is a case to accuse America of annexation, but even that has a dubious foundation.
Agree to disagree King, I believe we do indeed have an empire. At the very least, we are willing to drop a very heavy hand on anyone who threatens what we believe to be our interests. Our government acts in a manner toward the rest of the world that we would not tolerate within our own borders and indeed, we act in ways that precisely contradict the sensibilities of the founding fathers. I don't believe we have intended to become an empire, but it has nonetheless happened. We've stomped on the sovereignty of quite a few nations, we are waging uncontrolled drone warfare, we are sending advisors back into Iraq because after we invaded that country for no reason, the oil refineries have become the target and property of ISIS. I'm not so naive as to believe we can never deal with scumbags and dictators. But we have done so with an enormous amount of hubris. I dont' remotely believe the people killed on our soil on 9/11 deserved that. But I also don't believe that was some random event that wasn't driven in part by retaliation.
I have true admiration for the founding fathers and a sense of awe that they came together as you mention and accomplished what they did. Everything lined up perfectly and something amazing happened. Yet, I also believe the founding fathers intended for us to create solutions that are appropriate to the situation and times they occur in. This is where my alleged communist thinking sharply diverges from that of William. As wise as they were, they were trapped in world that accepted slavery and women as property to be abused as they saw fit. It took more time and social change to correct that. Their thinking was ahead of the time they lived in, but the ultimate legislation was not. I don't believe they should be worshiped as deities and like Reagan, they are indeed worshiped as Gods. I believe we can solve the issues we face in 2014, but not with a rigid ideology rooted in a mentality of over 200 years ago. Currently, a small segment of our country is hell bent on denying the rest of us a chance to fix things through consensus. I don't believe the FF's intended that at all
Denying the rest of us Max? Don't flatter yourself. The House of Representatives is made up of a majority that disagrees with your progressive mentality.
Currently, a small segment of our country is hell bent on denying the rest of us a chance to fix things through consensus.
Would that be like ignoring the immigration laws? If you don't like a law you can say it's broken and needs to be fixed. The broken is the person who refuses to enforce the law.
Would that be like passing a healthcare law the majority opposes and change it for political expediency?
Would that be like the Senate refusing to negotiate a budget with the house?
It cuts both ways and the Repub's are as guilty as the Dems. The problem we have is there is no compromise today, just the big guy saying I'll use my pen and phone. To change the laws I don't like. You cannot change anything by consensus as long as we are leaderless.
"Denying the rest of us Max? Don't flatter yourself. The House of Representatives is made up of a majority that disagrees with your progressive mentality."
The house of representatives contains a majority that is in disagreement with itself. The only thing they pass are blatantly partisan bills that do not need Democrat support. The Democrats have a majority in the Senate, but people like you seem to believe the founding fathers intended that no legislation should be allowed to pass unless there is a two thirds majority for every vote. Same ol shit.
Lou,
You have the perfect position on immigration. Obama has said what he has said, and even though there is plenty of gray area, you can claim the absolutist stance and be correct. Obama= cause of all problems with immigration because he won't follow the law. Everyone else= doesn't matter that they won't let a vote happen because Obama won't enforce current law. I get it.
The Democrats passed a shitty healthcare law that was just like what Bush did, namely it was a give away to insurance companies. I think it's somewhat simple. We have two systems in this country, the for profit part that has a good risk pool, and the unprofitable one full of the sickest of the sick that we all pay for. We want to defend that profit to the death so most discussions are pretty moot after that.
The budget thing is kind of a red herring. Pretty much every budget the congress votes for has a repeal of Obamacare. Boehnor is pretty much handcuffed. Now that the Repubs have created themselves gerymandered districts of purity, they are getting outflanked to their right. He is a leader in name only in that he cannot bring bills to the floor that require Democrat support to pass. I don't think he's a complete ideologue, but hes stuck and he's not really leading anything. Blaming Obama for the petulance of both houses has gotten old, just as blaming Bush for everything did. When you did below the surface, there is a different picture.
Honestly, as much as I don't relish the thought of voting for Republican candidate Hillary, she as close to a moderate Republican as we will get, just like her husband was. She will continue giving corporate free passes to everything, will likely continue our drone warfare and will not raise taxes. In short, Hillary is cut from the very same cloth that a guy like Boehnor is cut from. Obama is an uppity negro and that doesn't sit well with what is left of the white majority. I have a hunch that no matter who is POTUS next, we will miraculously start to see shit get done. Not because Obama is doing anything in particular that is blocking the houses, but simply because he is not one of them. Hillary is.
Hey Max. How's the heat treating you? Another 97 today. I so dislike summer in the city. MAy have to go look for a place in the mountains.
healthcare is easy to fix. Include everyone. Basic coverage only. No freebies, no bells, no whistles. Pay for it with a national sales tax. Everyone uses it, everyone pays for it. Instead we have the pandering to special interests. A bit discouraging at best.
An interesting thought of gerrymandering of districts. We were a solid Republican district and we were gerrymandered by the Democrats half was combined with Aurora, the other half combined with Littleton, Centennial. In any case in 2010 it required more work to maintain our representative. Guess it works both ways.
As to getting things done, when the leaders in the House and Senate are replaced, hopefully with people who will negotiate, things will get done. Not that Obama will sign anything unless of course it's in his best interest. The sad part is Obama had the opportunity to make a difference however he chose the partisan path. Like the budget, give me what I want or I will close the government and blame it on you. He certainly is paying the price for his first 2 years of marginalizing the repub's.
I'm hoping for a leader. Hillary isn't it. Hopefully the repub's will come up with a dark horse. None of the wanna be's are it so far. The person will have to decide to be a 1 term president and make the hard decisions which neither Bush or Obama were willing to make.
We actually have had a reprieve here and it has been cloudy and at times rainy. I've been joking with people that this is what it's like to walk outside of my garage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VG9ZlEFDds kinda funny.
Your idea on a plan there is at least a minimum that I would agree with. I'm not sure if this is what you envision, but I believe there should be a yearly checkup, at least one visit for an acute situation, and then catastrophic coverage, like for bills over 10k. This would take away the lottery ticket policies that insurance companies make money on, and would also take away the basic coverage market from them. I say let them compete for coverage between 1-10k and let them run drug buying clubs, which is essentially what Walmart has become. I ultimately want to see people live healthy and that's a little harder sell. I've had to start doing a pretty good chunk of reading on this stuff and though I know improving access to care is a policy goal, I'm not convinced this will be the best bang for the buck. It's a start. We agree though, this is special interest driven.
On gerrymandering, I think it's biting the Republicans more than Dems. They are the ones being outflanked by tea party candidates who are really freaky and have no chance of winning the WH. We;ve exhausted talking about who is more partisan, but objectively, I'm not sure who Obama has done that is sharply caustic, at least, in comparison with the general tone in Washington right now. There is plenty of a fuck you mentality going everywhere. As the first POTUS from my generation, I am disappointed but, given the entrenched power bases in Washington, I guess it's hard to expect different. Not trying to go tit for tat here, but the Dems were sharply marginalized when the Republicans held all three houses. Comparatively, Obama delivered on what he said he would with healthcare....sorta. Republicans could have made hard choices too and chose not to.
Like I said, Hillary is the closest chance we have for a moderate Republican. I don't want her either. As an optimist, I would like to think that after Obama is gone, the last lions in office of the boomer generation might decide they would like their legacy to be something more than bitter partisanship and near complete selling of the legislative process to special interest.
Catastrophic coverage is a great idea. People tend not to go with a cold but go when it's necessary. Convert all the medicaid people to the same plan and possibly costs would go down a bit. As I watch people over weight/obese go to the doctor, shouldn't people with risky life styles pay more? There has to be a way to get people motivated to lose weight in this country. We need to eliminate all the freebies that boost the cost of healthcare.
It's time politicians start listening to the people. The majority of people dislike the ACA, why is it Obama refuses to change it to make it acceptable? Is it because it has his name on it?
I feflect back to the Newt/Clinton years. They were quite different but could still reach agreement and compromise to get things done. It took Clinton to change to get there. Today we have Obama who refuses to compromise and the House republicans unwilling to give anything. They thought after giving Obama his tax increases after the election that things would change. They didn't, for the effort, they got nothing.
If Hillary is the candidate, I would have to sit that out or vote 3rd party depending on who the Repub's select. Out of all the real people that could meet the needs of the country, this is what we get. Pathetic.
Interesting topic William and particularly applicable for the 4th of July. I have my own views of Sam Adams and William and the Tea Party views are certainly at variance with mainstream America and probably mine as well!
ReplyDeleteI think most outsiders who study your history treat Adams as nothing more than a carbuncle on the arse or a revolution. A bomb maker who with skilful oratory and dogged determination forged for himself a place in history greater than his worth.
I compare Adams to Patrick Henry, less well known outside the US than is Adams but who surely had a far greater claim to fame in the struggles of those early years.
I welcome comments (good and bad) as so much of what I claim to believe comes from readers here and elsewhere who exchange ideas. Adams of course never accepted an idea which was at variance with his own monocular dogma.
To you all, a happy and successful 4th of July.
Cheers from Aussie
I guess what always kind of amazes me is the cult like status that is given to these men coupled with a belief that we must not decide anything for ourselves in 2014 without first trying to make it square with what we believe the founding fathers would have done. As if to say that nothing of philosophical consequence occurred before they decided to take the country away from the Indians while building it with slaves from elsewhere in the world, and also that nothing created by the puny minds since then has risen to any level high enough to be considered equally worthy.
ReplyDeleteIn their day, they claimed independence from a belief that some fool, by luck of birth, should be given the proclamation to rule others. It's always been about power, nothing more, nothing less. Admirable as it was they spread that power out a little further, they clearly had limits in mind for how far they were willing to spread that power. Times changed, and we decided to spread it further. Some believe the universe is expanding like a rubber band that will eventually snap back to it's original shape and size. The conservatives in this country, IMO, want to see this exact phenomenon happen to our society. After consciously choosing to unwind slavery and exclusion of women, we are now headed back from whence we came. In the years of WW II, we truly backed freedom from tyranny. Now, we are mostly trying to protect our empire.
You being part of the hate America first crowd Max the 4th of July must be a tough day for you.
DeleteNo William, I don't hate America. What I dislike are ideologues who resort to stupid comments like yours whenever you have nothing to say. You are quite proud of the FF's, Reagan, and your Tea Party and in you insecurity, you are not able to accept so much as an ounce of honest criticism. You are part of the "My country first and always, right or wrong". You worship capitalist types, yet, you seemingly cannot understand the concept that everything action and item of consumption has a cost.
DeleteYeah and your hero Billy Ayers doesn't hate America either.
DeleteNo one's saying you shouldn't think and decide for yourself. You exaggerate absolute everything you disagree with. Your thoughts honestly pale in comparison with the FF's.
You of course believe in socialism, apologizing only when you posit that the wrong people are running things.
Happy 4th Max. Even you are allowed to pursue your happiness.
ReplyDeleteSo much of what you say Max is correct. Conversely so much is also, in my humble opinion, incorrect.
It has long intrigued me to see the reverence which is paid to the constitution and the Bill of Rights. So much so that the constitution is such an important aspect of the presidential oath. This as you say, appears to stem from the founders who sit atop the mountain called worship, from this lofty edifice they are accorded ever growing adulation and recognition of their wisdom. After so long studying the early history, I am truly amazed that a group of men could simultaneously come together in a time when such a group was needed to progress a threadbare colony into nationhood. Virginia produced four of the first five presidents and many others in the political scene hailed from the same state.Wythe, as a friend and colleague of Jefferson had great influence. These men deserve the honour and respect you still pay them; they would also be the first to agree that times having changed, the constitution needs to change to reflect those changes.
I cannot agree that America is trying to protect her empire. Trying perhaps to protect her interests but with all the faults, your country has never been an empire builder; James Munroe curtailed expansionism for the two centuries that really mattered. Perhaps there is a case to accuse America of annexation, but even that has a dubious foundation.
Cheers from Aussie
Agree to disagree King, I believe we do indeed have an empire. At the very least, we are willing to drop a very heavy hand on anyone who threatens what we believe to be our interests. Our government acts in a manner toward the rest of the world that we would not tolerate within our own borders and indeed, we act in ways that precisely contradict the sensibilities of the founding fathers. I don't believe we have intended to become an empire, but it has nonetheless happened. We've stomped on the sovereignty of quite a few nations, we are waging uncontrolled drone warfare, we are sending advisors back into Iraq because after we invaded that country for no reason, the oil refineries have become the target and property of ISIS. I'm not so naive as to believe we can never deal with scumbags and dictators. But we have done so with an enormous amount of hubris. I dont' remotely believe the people killed on our soil on 9/11 deserved that. But I also don't believe that was some random event that wasn't driven in part by retaliation.
DeleteI have true admiration for the founding fathers and a sense of awe that they came together as you mention and accomplished what they did. Everything lined up perfectly and something amazing happened. Yet, I also believe the founding fathers intended for us to create solutions that are appropriate to the situation and times they occur in. This is where my alleged communist thinking sharply diverges from that of William. As wise as they were, they were trapped in world that accepted slavery and women as property to be abused as they saw fit. It took more time and social change to correct that. Their thinking was ahead of the time they lived in, but the ultimate legislation was not. I don't believe they should be worshiped as deities and like Reagan, they are indeed worshiped as Gods. I believe we can solve the issues we face in 2014, but not with a rigid ideology rooted in a mentality of over 200 years ago. Currently, a small segment of our country is hell bent on denying the rest of us a chance to fix things through consensus. I don't believe the FF's intended that at all
Denying the rest of us Max? Don't flatter yourself. The House of Representatives is made up of a majority that disagrees with your progressive mentality.
DeleteCurrently, a small segment of our country is hell bent on denying the rest of us a chance to fix things through consensus.
DeleteWould that be like ignoring the immigration laws? If you don't like a law you can say it's broken and needs to be fixed. The broken is the person who refuses to enforce the law.
Would that be like passing a healthcare law the majority opposes and change it for political expediency?
Would that be like the Senate refusing to negotiate a budget with the house?
It cuts both ways and the Repub's are as guilty as the Dems. The problem we have is there is no compromise today, just the big guy saying I'll use my pen and phone. To change the laws I don't like.
You cannot change anything by consensus as long as we are leaderless.
Another glorious 97 degree day.
"Denying the rest of us Max? Don't flatter yourself. The House of Representatives is made up of a majority that disagrees with your progressive mentality."
DeleteThe house of representatives contains a majority that is in disagreement with itself. The only thing they pass are blatantly partisan bills that do not need Democrat support. The Democrats have a majority in the Senate, but people like you seem to believe the founding fathers intended that no legislation should be allowed to pass unless there is a two thirds majority for every vote. Same ol shit.
Lou,
You have the perfect position on immigration. Obama has said what he has said, and even though there is plenty of gray area, you can claim the absolutist stance and be correct. Obama= cause of all problems with immigration because he won't follow the law. Everyone else= doesn't matter that they won't let a vote happen because Obama won't enforce current law. I get it.
The Democrats passed a shitty healthcare law that was just like what Bush did, namely it was a give away to insurance companies. I think it's somewhat simple. We have two systems in this country, the for profit part that has a good risk pool, and the unprofitable one full of the sickest of the sick that we all pay for. We want to defend that profit to the death so most discussions are pretty moot after that.
The budget thing is kind of a red herring. Pretty much every budget the congress votes for has a repeal of Obamacare. Boehnor is pretty much handcuffed. Now that the Repubs have created themselves gerymandered districts of purity, they are getting outflanked to their right. He is a leader in name only in that he cannot bring bills to the floor that require Democrat support to pass. I don't think he's a complete ideologue, but hes stuck and he's not really leading anything. Blaming Obama for the petulance of both houses has gotten old, just as blaming Bush for everything did. When you did below the surface, there is a different picture.
Honestly, as much as I don't relish the thought of voting for Republican candidate Hillary, she as close to a moderate Republican as we will get, just like her husband was. She will continue giving corporate free passes to everything, will likely continue our drone warfare and will not raise taxes. In short, Hillary is cut from the very same cloth that a guy like Boehnor is cut from. Obama is an uppity negro and that doesn't sit well with what is left of the white majority. I have a hunch that no matter who is POTUS next, we will miraculously start to see shit get done. Not because Obama is doing anything in particular that is blocking the houses, but simply because he is not one of them. Hillary is.
Hey Max. How's the heat treating you? Another 97 today. I so dislike summer in the city. MAy have to go look for a place in the mountains.
ReplyDeletehealthcare is easy to fix. Include everyone. Basic coverage only. No freebies, no bells, no whistles. Pay for it with a national sales tax. Everyone uses it, everyone pays for it. Instead we have the pandering to special interests. A bit discouraging at best.
An interesting thought of gerrymandering of districts. We were a solid Republican district and we were gerrymandered by the Democrats half was combined with Aurora, the other half combined with Littleton, Centennial. In any case in 2010 it required more work to maintain our representative. Guess it works both ways.
As to getting things done, when the leaders in the House and Senate are replaced, hopefully with people who will negotiate, things will get done. Not that Obama will sign anything unless of course it's in his best interest. The sad part is Obama had the opportunity to make a difference however he chose the partisan path. Like the budget, give me what I want or I will close the government and blame it on you. He certainly is paying the price for his first 2 years of marginalizing the repub's.
I'm hoping for a leader. Hillary isn't it. Hopefully the repub's will come up with a dark horse. None of the wanna be's are it so far. The person will have to decide to be a 1 term president and make the hard decisions which neither Bush or Obama were willing to make.
Hope things are well in Vegas.
Heya Lou,
DeleteWe actually have had a reprieve here and it has been cloudy and at times rainy. I've been joking with people that this is what it's like to walk outside of my garage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VG9ZlEFDds kinda funny.
Your idea on a plan there is at least a minimum that I would agree with. I'm not sure if this is what you envision, but I believe there should be a yearly checkup, at least one visit for an acute situation, and then catastrophic coverage, like for bills over 10k. This would take away the lottery ticket policies that insurance companies make money on, and would also take away the basic coverage market from them. I say let them compete for coverage between 1-10k and let them run drug buying clubs, which is essentially what Walmart has become. I ultimately want to see people live healthy and that's a little harder sell. I've had to start doing a pretty good chunk of reading on this stuff and though I know improving access to care is a policy goal, I'm not convinced this will be the best bang for the buck. It's a start. We agree though, this is special interest driven.
On gerrymandering, I think it's biting the Republicans more than Dems. They are the ones being outflanked by tea party candidates who are really freaky and have no chance of winning the WH. We;ve exhausted talking about who is more partisan, but objectively, I'm not sure who Obama has done that is sharply caustic, at least, in comparison with the general tone in Washington right now. There is plenty of a fuck you mentality going everywhere. As the first POTUS from my generation, I am disappointed but, given the entrenched power bases in Washington, I guess it's hard to expect different. Not trying to go tit for tat here, but the Dems were sharply marginalized when the Republicans held all three houses. Comparatively, Obama delivered on what he said he would with healthcare....sorta. Republicans could have made hard choices too and chose not to.
Like I said, Hillary is the closest chance we have for a moderate Republican. I don't want her either. As an optimist, I would like to think that after Obama is gone, the last lions in office of the boomer generation might decide they would like their legacy to be something more than bitter partisanship and near complete selling of the legislative process to special interest.
Catastrophic coverage is a great idea. People tend not to go with a cold but go when it's necessary. Convert all the medicaid people to the same plan and possibly costs would go down a bit. As I watch people over weight/obese go to the doctor, shouldn't people with risky life styles pay more? There has to be a way to get people motivated to lose weight in this country. We need to eliminate all the freebies that boost the cost of healthcare.
ReplyDeleteIt's time politicians start listening to the people. The majority of people dislike the ACA, why is it Obama refuses to change it to make it acceptable? Is it because it has his name on it?
I feflect back to the Newt/Clinton years. They were quite different but could still reach agreement and compromise to get things done. It took Clinton to change to get there. Today we have Obama who refuses to compromise and the House republicans unwilling to give anything. They thought after giving Obama his tax increases after the election that things would change. They didn't, for the effort, they got nothing.
If Hillary is the candidate, I would have to sit that out or vote 3rd party depending on who the Repub's select. Out of all the real people that could meet the needs of the country, this is what we get. Pathetic.