KD - Thanks man. Seriously. I like having an actual debate without the useless one-liners.
- Bank Bailout
Theoretically, I would have been against any and all the bailout plans (whether they were supported by President Bush or President Obama). I think bailouts encourage failure, especially for companies that lobby Congress so effectively and can lobby Congress effectively in the future. However, realistically, the bailouts were necessary to prevent the collapse of, as you call it, Main Street. Therefore, I think I support the bank bailouts, if only because they appear to have worked.
I also agree that banks, and others, need to curb suspicious and harmful practices (my biggest beef has to do with the insistence on giving loans to homebuyers who cannot afford such loans). However, I believe the government's role in "preventing" these practices is to educate the public, and not impose regulations. An educated public will make better decisions; and if they don't make better decisions, they should fail (and, really, we have a pretty easy failure system - bankruptcy is not as onerous as it sounds).
- Auto Bailout
What are your thoughts on this one?
- Healthcare
I do not support the healthcare plan (either the theoretical plan or the actual plan). The actual plan costs entirely too much money for what it actually does (I believe I read somewhere that 26 million people will remain uninsured). I also do not think anyone has actually died because of lack of medical care due to lack of insurance; I think that's a false argument based on emotional response rather than actual occurences. However, I do understand the rising healthcare costs are, in some way, related to the uninsured using emergency rooms as their doctors' offices. As I've indicated in other, older threads, I support the federal government insuring Americans who cannot afford insurance (to cut down those costs). I also support the portabiltiy and availability of health insurance throughout the United States (to increase competition). Those things apparently did not make it into the law.
Your characterization of the reason the law did not go far enough seems to be the requested response to the politicizing that the Democrats did to explain why the bill sucked. The Republicans did not help the bill fail. The Democrats did that all on their own (when health insurers are paying money to both parties, they have the support of both parties). If you recall, after the president's summit with the Republicans (which I watched, I loved, and I want to see more of), there were no changes to the healthcare plan.
By the way, I know a whole lot of doctors and you're the first one I've seen (that's not on TV with the president) who supports the Democratic version of healthcare reform.
- Wars
I agree with your views.
- Patriot Act
Yep, I agree with your views here too.
- Gay Marriage
I also agree with your views (except the Christian part). If a homosexual couple was married, I think recongition should be given across religious and societal sections.
- Obama v. McCain/Palin
Although I did not vote for McCain/Palin for other reasons (namely, I did not see much of a difference between the two candidates), I understand and agree with your views (although, I'm not sure Sarah Palin would be relevant as vice president and Joe Biden is pretty moronic and insane himself).
- Tea Party
I think it's very clear that the Tea Party has some racist members (as do most other organizations, including, but not limited to the Democrats, the Republicans, the Black Panthers, the NAACP, the Catholic Church, etc., etc.). I also think that the Democrats have attempted to focus scrutiny on those elements and have ignored the economic views of the movement. I may be a little paranoid, but I think this is a purposeful attempt to divert attention away from the ideas of limited government and to encourage marginalization. There is a video on YouTube which shows that people on the opposite side of the spectrum from the Tea Party masses making quite inflammatory comments about then-President Bush.
My point here is that for one to characterize the Tea Party movement as largely racist, based on some placards and some statements, is a mischaracterization. It's as if I would look at that YouTube video and characterize the Democrat Party as criminal because they want President Bush to die. In sum, the characterization of the Tea Party movement as racist is tired and shows a lack of any sort of thought about fiscal policy (yeah, I'm talking to you Jaenene Garafalo).
- Your Posts
I shouldn't have concentrated on this in the first place, so I won't do it again here.
King Doctor wrote:Well I'm sory to hear that you feel that way, as you seem to be a highly erudite and sincere young man. I hope that in time your feelings towards me will warm, and I assure you that I shall endeavour to conduct myself in a fashion that will make such a transition as easy as possible for you.
Thanks (mostly for the "young" part). It's not the ease of transition that concerns me. I'm fairly used to the deconstruction of others' arguments in the forum of mocking posts. After all, my favorite poster is SultanOfSurreal.
