Can someone explain to me why anyone wants to vote for McCain/Palin?

Well, European and Canadian members, how is your healthcare? Do you ever have to wait, or are unable to get your prescription? Have you ever had any notable problems, or bad health care?

It's perfect here in the Netherlands, and I think our system should be perfect for the US since its not socialist healthcare but a goverment controled private healthcare system based on a number of rules:

-All citizens must by law have basic insurance
-All insurance companies must by law accept all people, disregarding age, background, or previous illness
-the gouverment compensates the insurance companies for chronicly ill people
-the gouverment watches over the quality of healthcare offered by the private companies.
-If you don't like your insurance company? switch! It's very easy to switch, just send them a notice card and your done.

As for payment:
-a part is payed by yourself, apart by your employer and a part by the gouverment
-people who cannot afford the basic healthcare package will get more from the gouverment, or get free healthcare all together.
-people <18 will get free healthcare

This way you have both competition which has a good effect on the price of health insurance and you have a system where even choronicly or very ill people can get good and effordable healthcare without losing good quality. :D

as far as waiting times, if I needed to see a doctor I can usually do so the same day, or the next. You can always get your medicine within the hour after you got a prescripion from your doctor. As for service, I had a little motorcycle accident a few months ago, I just went to the hospital, there I just showed my insurance card, they threated me and thats it. I never got any bills, letters or whatever.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkLxk335cHs[/YOUTUBE]
 
Last edited:
Eh? And you can't go to court about a public matter or what?
Apart from that, I don't think you have a clue how centralized health care works in most countries.
Other than what my buddy in Toronto tells me about Canadian healthcare, I don't really pay much attention to what other countries do.

The government here makes it difficult to fight them in court. That's a gift from the American Left. It's not impossible, but you need friends in high places.

And, the American Left wants the federal government to control every aspect of medical care. Ultimately, they don't want any of it privatized any more than they want Social Security privatized (something Bush suggested that drove the Left into screaming fits). If they can't have 100% control, then they want complete control over the private sector health care providers. And considering how well they've done with everything else they've touched, that would drive the private sector providers out of business. And guess where that would leave us?

Fortunately, not everyone in American government is a liberal/leftist/socialist.

Can we get back to the election now, please?
 
So far as U.S. healthcare goes, i was under the impression insurance was actually affordable until people started talking about socializing it. Anybody wanna clearify what caused U.S. insurance prices to spiral?

I can see how socialized health care works in other countries, but i have trouble believing large Hospitals would make it a easy transition in this country, however I'm not really huge on this issue.
 
Do you get a tax break for having private health insurance?

here if you earn over a certain threshold it costs you less tax if you have private health cover, you still get money back from the government for visits etc. A visit to the GP for a general checkup the other day for my brother was $30 after rebate

Not necessarily. When a private-sector health insurance company says it won't pay for your treatment (as my dental ins. company did recently), you have options. You and/or your doctor can make an appeal, an attorney can step in for you, etc.

But when the government is the sole provider and it says no, you're screwed. And trust me, governments say no to their citizens all the time.


Take a look at Australia's system for instance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(Australia)

That article is pretty well written and should give you an idea, dentist work is covered and you get most of your money back through medicare. Usually the only things that aren't covered are things like boob jobs etc (they recently updated it cover it if a breast has been removed because of cancer though)
 
I'll tell you why. First, the macro level. Then, why I will not vote for Obama.

My opinion on why the public is turning against him:

First, talking to European friends and Europeans who live here in the US that have been to Europe recently, you take such a one-sided socialist view of everything here. I.E. I have a coworker from Turkey who was in Switzerland last week and every book store has Obama Obama Obama, and not just the same book but several different Obama books. Walking around Europe you are obsessed with Obama (if you like him so much, make him Chancellor of the EU) and you wouldn't even know there IS any opposition to him. Talk about biased views. Additionally, let me let you Europeans in on a little secret: it makes us mad when you pull so hard for a candidate, we don't want your opinion on who YOU want. It's none of your business.

Second, a lot of people on the Democratic side were very big Hillary Clinton supporters and have a hard time voting for Obama, as this was supposed to be Hillary's big moment. Obama is a political nobody, he comes out of the corrupt Chicago political system with a background in "community organizing" (read: professional protester and shakedown artist ala Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson) and he is a lightweight with only 2 years in the Senate. Hillary supporters are stunned because in their view (and probably in Hillary's) the Democratic Nomination was a lock.

An offshoot to this: America is no longer a melting pot because politicians thrive on division. The corollary is, take for example the Democratic party, it is a group of special interests that sometimes conflict. Take for example, union labor vs. environmentalists. Both are special interest groups whose goals may conflict -- labor unions want more jobs and construction, environmentalists want to halt civilization and stop polluting the planet. In this case, we have the feminists who were behind Hillary versus the affirmative action racketeers -- either the first Woman president or the first Black president. Someone had to lose, and the Hillary camp is bruised and upset.

Further, if you look at this from Hillary's political ambitions, it's advantageous for Obama to lose so she can run again in 2012. Further, if Obama wins trust me he will clean the Democrat Party infrastructure of the Clinton people that still control it and install his own people. So I expect there is some sabotage on the part of the Clintons and I expect 2 weeks before the election her camp will give McCain's folks some heavily damaging dirt.

Why I won't vote for Obama:

First, this Presidential cycle is strange because all three major candidates (Hillary Clinton, Barack Hussein Obama, John McCain) are Senators. Senators are not executives, they don't run things, from a town to a county to a state. They have never had to make a budget or hire/fire people. Senators are people who spend most of their time out of their home state in Washington, DC, attending committee meetings and lining their pockets, jockeying for power. At the end of the day, they have virtually nothing to do with the day-to-day running of their state, they just bring home pork barrel money back to the state when it is time for re-election. Further, Senators have lengthy 6 year terms so they aren't re-connecting with their constituents as much as other politicians. It's hard to think of the last time a sitting Senator was elected President, I think it would be John F. Kennedy. Usually Governors are successful at Presidential bids over Senators, because Governors actually run their states on a day-to-day basis.

Second, I dislike both candidates. They are both big-government socialists (as is George W. Bush). Obama is the fast boat to outright socialism, McCain is the slow boat to outright socialism. They both are more likely to endorse policies I disagree with but one will do incidental damage to the country while the other is looking to run it off a cliff.

As much as the media is trying to portray McCain as some kind of right wing extremist, this is the same media who was pining for him as "The Maverick(tm)" against G.W. Bush 8 years ago, he was their favored candidate! McCain has several left wing viewpoints where he has stabbed his party in the back (e.g. he is pro-amnesty for illegal aliens, McCain-Kennedy) and worse his campaign finance bill (McCain-Feingold) restricts free speech preventing you from criticizing incumbent politicians 60 days before an election. On most issues, McCain is a liberal. He's long been one of the most liberal Republicans.

OBama, meanwhile, doesn't have as much of a record as he's only been in the Senate for 2 years and didn't distinguish himself before that in local Illinois politics. I don't care about his skin color, but I care a lot about his past. He is an outright socialist who thinks government is the answer to every question. He is a community agitator (aka shakedown artist). He tries to obscure his past (original father, brother in Kenya, 2nd father, Indonesia and his time in a Madrass, etc.). His teenage years were spent in an exclusive, expensive private school in Hawaii where his friends called him "Barry". He has unquestionable ties to shady figures, such as William Ayers, a leftist domestic terrorist who killed people with his bombs, and his hate-mongering reverand who baptised his children and spewed his hatred every Sunday but whom he dumped when the media spotlight was on and claimed he never heard any of the reverand's hate speech. He equates government to morality, urging us to remember the "least amongst us" (via taxes) while his brother lives in Kenya on $1 per month.

The thing that worries me about Obama are:

(1) He's a lightweight who dislodged Queen Hillary, heir apparent to the Democratic machine. There is more than meets the eye, here. Who is behind him, who is the unseen hand that is making this happen? (My bets are on the ilk of George Sauros, et al, who I view as viral and destructive). To overcome the Clinton's stranglehold on the Democratic party (most of Clinton's guys are still in charge) there is a large force at work.

(2) He seems to be vastly incompetent. Not only does he have negligible experience in the senate, but he's never actually run or managed anything, not a lemonade stand, not a town council, NOTHING.

(3) For all his talk of "change", all his rhetoric is straight out of FDR's New Deal (1933), LBJ's Great Society (1964), if not Marx/Ingles. Change by itself isn't necessarily good.

(4) The media is in love with him for his great speeches. In opposition to George W. Bush's stammerring. I think a lot of people are being shallow and simply looking for a figurehead who at least appears to speak well. Anyone paying attention (i.e. not just seeing 30 second clips in the media) will note that Obama turns into a stammering stream of "uhhhhhs" when he's off script. He's good at reading, terrible at improvisational speaking.

(5) He says incredibly stupid things (such as there are 57 states in the US, or Iran is geographically small and thus isn't a threat) that would have gotten Dan Quayle or George Bush on the opening Leno/Letterman monologues for months, but the media ignores his gaffes. I really don't think Obama is intelligent at all.

So let's see, he has no executive experience, he isn't bright, and he seems to be a puppet. What's not to like? :lol:

I don't like both candidates. However, McCain has the benefits of experience and fundamentally I feel his is a decent human being. The down sides are that he's old, very old, and being President takes lots of stamina. And that VP pick couldn't have been worse, what the hell is he thinking?

On the issues they are virtually the same to me aside from the following areas:

- The war. Obama let's face it won't pull out so quickly as he promised early in his candidacy. Obama's posture is weak and don't think that thugs in Iran and Venezuela aren't salivating if he gets in. McCain is more hawkish. I wish either one would take steps to end the war in Iraq without an outright pullout or collapse because that just strengthens Ahmedinejad.

- Abortion. Obama is so radical that he is in favor of infanticide (voted in Chicago to deny medical care to babies that survive late term abortions -- in other words they are left to die a painful death outside the womb and die of starvation/dehydration, not even euthanized). McCain is probably pro-choice but has to pander to the religious. Either way, I don't feel a candidate will tackle this. It didn't change under right wingers like Nixon or Reagan, I don't see it ever being overturned. Plus, it isn't that big of an issue anymore, people think abortion is a big hot button issue but few people care about it anymore it isn't an issue other than issue "enthusiasts".

- Economy. Obama is an outright big-government socialist, McCain at least gives lip service to capitalism although the republicans are just as socialist as the Democrats (I'm looking at Fannie Mae/Freddy Mac takeovers, AIG bailout, complete fiscal irresponsibility and out of control spending, etc.). Either way we are screwed.

On the running mates:

- Sarah Palin is exactly what Obama is -- inexperienced. But at least she has been a mayor of a town and governor of a state. While that makes her more qualified than Obama in my view, it still doesn't make her qualified to be in line for the presidency. I don't want her anywhere near the whitehouse. If McCain croakes, or if he doesn't run again in 2012, is she in? God help us.

- Joe Biden is pure scum, the poster child for everything that is wrong with a Washington DC politician. I still get douche chills from his performance during the Anita Hill hearings.

So, IMO they both suck but Obama is just plain dangerous. I will unenthusiastically vote for McCain and hope he doesn't die in office and Palin never gets to sit behind the big desk.
 
Last edited:
Let's get real for a second. After the last 8 years, the Republicans simply don't deserve another 4 years (let alone 8). Unfortunately, because of this 2-party duopoly, that means the only alternative is the Democrats.

And that's the real game.

As I've gotten older, I've gotten more cynical, and I've come to believe our duopoly is really an oligarchy, a ruling class of elites that pose as Hatfields and McCoys, a shell game. Behind closed doors these guys are slapping each other on the backs. It's a choice of Diet Coke or Diet Pepsi when you want orange juice.

Republicans get it for 8 years, Democrats get it for 8 years, Republicans get it for 8 years -- it's the never ending cycle of A messed it up, give B a chance, and then 8 years later B messed it up give A a chance. When either side is out of power, they go and work for a think tank or a government institution like Fanny Mae/Freddy Mac, or they collect millions sitting on a company's board of directors.

In reality, they are both the same and the issues we fight over are by and large distractions. They are an OLIGARCHY, they are one and the same, selling the country down the river.
 
Last edited:
And that's the real game.

As I've gotten older, I've gotten more cynical, and I've come to believe our duopoly is really an oligarchy, a ruling class of elites that pose as Hatfields and McCoys, a shell game. Behind closed doors these guys are slapping each other on the backs. It's a choice of Diet Coke or Diet Pepsi when you want orange juice.

Republicans get it for 8 years, Democrats get it for 8 years, Republicans get it for 8 years -- it's the never ending cycle of A messed it up, give B a chance, and then 8 years later B messed it up give A a chance. When either side is out of power, they go and work for a think tank or a government institution like Fanny Mae/Freddy Mac, or they collect millions sitting on a company's board of directors.

In reality, they are both the same and the issues we fight over are by and large distractions. They are an OLIGARCHY, they are one and the same, selling the country down the river.

Maybe this is a bit shallow, but +rep for you. You seem to summarize what i think a lot of free-thinking Americans believe.

At the same rate look at how crap 3rd parties worked in Britain (Labor)
 
Maybe this is a bit shallow, but +rep for you. You seem to summarize what i think a lot of free-thinking Americans believe.

At the same rate look at how crap 3rd parties worked in Britain (Labor)

The US is locked into a two-party system, and I reckon is very very hard for a third party to squeeze in there at all. Will this change? I don't know, but it will take a big change in The Order for it to happen.

In the UK we do have three main parties, but again it's essentially a two-party system, with the third always promising to break in, but never managing it.

What interests me, though, is 'are nations always going to end up with a two-party system?'.
 
What interests me, though, is 'are nations always going to end up with a two-party system?'.
... in our the national Parlament (and in the federal too) we now have 6 Parties (christian democrats, christian socialsts, social democrats, liberals, greens and the "left") ... 2 really big ones, and some smaller ones. 20 Years ago, we (western germany) only had 4 (the first 4 ones of that list). Yet, the system keeps on working ... (with it?s faults)

Over here, I think splitting up is more a trend in the political Parties ... it?s quite normal that on national or federal level for 2 parties to form koalistions, but nowadays people start talking more and more about 3-way koalistions. I think germany is heading not only not into a 2-party-system, it?s getting much more diverse over here, People are fed up with the big "classic" parties and are looking for smaller ones that follow their interests more.
 
... in our the national Parlament (and in the federal too) we now have 6 Parties (christian democrats, christian socialsts, social democrats, liberals, greens and the "left") ... 2 really big ones, and some smaller ones. 20 Years ago, we (western germany) only had 4 (the first 4 ones of that list). Yet, the system keeps on working ... (with it?s faults)

Over here, I think splitting up is more a trend in the political Parties ... it?s quite normal that on national or federal level for 2 parties to form koalistions, but nowadays people start talking more and more about 3-way koalistions. I think germany is heading not only not into a 2-party-system, it?s getting much more diverse over here, People are fed up with the big "classic" parties and are looking for smaller ones that follow their interests more.

Yeah, it's splitting up more and more in Germany...

Along with the horridity that is the "Left Party" aka the kommunist party, it seems like its antipole, the NPD (nationalistic party) will be entering soon enough too. (Unless someone has the balls to step up and ban both the NPD and the Linke). Oh, and the republican party might get some votes too....

Only upside is, there's a good chance of the FDP being in the government next election.
 
... in our the national Parlament (and in the federal too) we now have 6 Parties (christian democrats, christian socialsts, social democrats, liberals, greens and the "left") ... 2 really big ones, and some smaller ones. 20 Years ago, we (western germany) only had 4 (the first 4 ones of that list). Yet, the system keeps on working ... (with it?s faults)

I was under the impression that the Bundestag uses MMP elections, which is why it's not two-party. The point is that a plurality "single winner" voting system, there cannot be more than two major parties. (That is, an environment with more [or less] than two parties is not at equilibrium.)
 
Now after watching for several time... Palin looks to me like the personification of all that "stupid" clich? we know from Bush caricatures. These where Bush holds the book upside down... looking through binoculars the wrong way and so on. She seems just endless clueless.
Like that: http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww

I'd be really scared if she was leader of my country. Only a solid religious base and a lack of everything else.. oh my god :cry: :cry: :cry:
 
You do realize that she has a job right?
 
That Couric interview is great. She finally did an interview with someone who actually pressed her. Sure Palin was fairly confident and somewhat charismatic, she's also hilariously uninformed. But I don't think it really matters. Bush Sr got into office with that idiot Quayle in tow.
 
In that Katie Korva interview I was with her up to the Pakistan part.

Spreading democracy is only good if people want it. I don't think people in Pakistan want it. Most of the world is a steaming pile of despair and despotism. Of course they have to play the naive line as far as Pakistan goes, everybody knows they're only as complicit as they are under threat of violence, their government itself has many warring factions, etc. How many government officials will discuss reality with Pakistan.

And she really fumbled on foreign policy as evidenced by her state being close to Russia and Canada. Certainly that could have been played up by pointing out that the state is isolated from the contiguous 48, etc. She's just parroting the boiler plate Neocon line that's been fed to her. But then again, how many governors and mayors have foreign policy experience? I could point to Bloomberg as his city hosts the UN, but it isn't the governor's job to visit foriegn countries and meet with foreign leaders. Otherwise we'd have 51 foreign policies. That's also why Senators tread a fine line when they meet with foreign leaders, we don't need 101 (or 151) foreign policies. That's why there is a State Department.

I think the passport conversation backfired on Katie Korva, I identified with what Palin was saying. Sure I'd like to travel the world but I've always been working since teenage years and putting myself through school and working. I didn't have the luxury of my mommy and daddy giving me $50,000 and a plane ticket to Paris to play for 6 months. I didn't get my passport until I was 36 and went to Germany, Japan, and Korea, all on business. I've never had a life of luxury to go backpacking in Europe for 6 months. I have never taken long vacations (my longest would be 9 days in Hawaii for my honeymoon) so I'm forced to do short vacations usually within a short plane ride from home for a few days.
 
Last edited:
Fact: McCain is 72 years old and could die tomorrow. I think that could be reason enough not to vote for him.
 
Fact: McCain is 72 years old and could die tomorrow. I think that could be reason enough not to vote for him.

Fact, so could you or I... what the hell is your point?
 
Top