there will be investigations, from congress, and Barack can keep his hands off of it politically simply by waiting for enough leaks and revelations to spur on congress ( and us ). We need to cover his back and go right to congress. He's bottom up, and we need to bottom up.
dumb and dumber anyone? These guys can't vet, they get too overexcited or whatever and don't plan ahead. Nothing new so far from the pugs? I guess they can't change, they think Barack's got that one already?
big surprise, but this came from us. We want a public option and we'll get one, the big question now is whether or not it will cover anyone who wants it, including healthy employed people who have work options. they can give us what we want but make sure it won't work, ya know. We can't stop now, they need to hear that it must be open to everyone, not only the certain select sickest.
we were all wondering where he was 'off' to, after 9/11 and there was speculation, but nothing to compare with the trut, so help me god. Plenty knew too, thus the darth vader jokes and Cheney's delight in them. Wackjobs ought not run for high office, but hey, he selected himself and his boss wasn't the brightest bulb. It's no longer news, but it remains disgusting and will, forever more, so help us all.
Sarah's problem wasn't her sex or her education, those might have been big pluses, but that she was George Bush, come back to us. They both make me cringe. It was a cynical play by the pugs thinking women will support any woman, even George Bush type women. While jokes about her were certainly sexist, not all of them of course, that was her cover, to claim she was dismissed as a serious candidate only because of her class and sex. Supporting her would be sexist, setting the bar lower to leave no fathead behind.
and would depend on what she could get passed, but she'd make it clear what she wants and she'd ask for that.
We should all weigh in on heath care, and not just to Barack, to our congress who ultimately need to pass the bill. They need to hear it loud and clear, elsewise they'll listen to the industry. They pay, but we vote.
i don't 'trust' either. I can think for myself. I don't need to make a false choice between which one to trust. The press can ask, the administration can answer and I can decide if the question was important or the answer transparent.
if they want only smart questions, there needs to be a test for reporters, and we wouldn't like that very much - who would decide which questioners are smart enough? I don't care if the questions aren't the best ones, if they can't be answered, then that's the answer. The point is that in a democracy we want the press to be free to ask anything. We want the best answers, not the best questions. We had Bush's style of excluding pesky reporters and getting shills. That can't be replaced with a new way of limiting questioners. Needs to be replaced with the old style, not a 'better' way of controlling what is asked.
he failed democracy 101, missed or refused to see the point.
His point is that screening questions is fairer because it allows more citizens to submit questions.
the counterpoint is that's paternalistic, and makes us all trust that the white house staff isn't screening out what they don't wish to answer. Since Barack could answer citizen questions in writing, he doesn't need to limit so-called open questions to those deemed most representative, by his staff. It's possible to do both.
The only answer to Helen's point is 'father knows best.' But Americans don't like that answer much, so he obfuscated.
I assume Barack was upset by this performance. The press is supposed to ask tough questions, and a 'smirk' isn't an answer that I like to see. DIdn't like it from Bush, and don't like it this time either.
there is a place for bloggers in working on this problem. The alternative press may also expose health risks and teach prevention techniques. By the by, how many diseases can be prevented by the correct use of condoms? Is there a list somewhere?
Michael did a public service in speaking openly about the abuse he suffered, but there is little doubt that it was being part of a musical family when he was little that gave him the chance to develop his talent, Mozart also came from a musical family. Lots of kids are abused by scary dads but that doesn't turn them all into success stories. Michael and others who have spoken out make it easier for other adults abused as children to speak and to know they are not alone. Michael cared about all kids, even those without special talents or opportunities.
Time will tell how disposable he may turn out to be, somehow I don't think so. He was a genius in his own right, and he isn't replaceable. When someone is not replaceable i doubt they'll ever be disposable.
that the world leaves behind far too many humans. but it's not true that being poor is in and of itself a terrible thing, if certain conditions are met. Food, medicine, shelter, safety. Education, the ability to express one's self.
I like the cheap computer for every child idea.
I like the sending reusable first world trash for tinkers (think Cuba) idea.
But nothing will make life bearable if one's children are sick or hungry or hunted.
Being poor may not ensure unhappiness, but being scared sure will.