I'm back, Baby! And I'm voting for Rick Perry!

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday September 15, 2010 · 8:41 PM PDT

2010/09/15 · 20:41

Ok, so I know already posted my GBCW diary a few months back and I still think that both parties are pretty much the same... but nevertheless, I'm back! Politics is like an addiction, no matter how pointless it seems I just can't stop following it!

Anyway, I just donated $100 of my hard earned money to Russ Feingold and I encourage everyone else to do the same. He's the only senator to vote against the original Patriot Act, and he's one of about 4 or 5 politicians that I still respect.

I've also decided that I will, once again, go to the polling place and vote for the lesser evil--who IMHO happens to be Rick Perry. I'll also go back to posting on this blog. That may not be for very long if I keep posting diaries like this!

Poll

128 votes Show Results

Who's the lesser evil?

128 votes Vote Now!

Who's the lesser evil?

Bill White

67 votes

Rick Perry

13 votes

Just Shoot Me!

48 votes

GBCW

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday March 11, 2010 · 7:08 PM PST

2010/03/11 · 19:08

So after much reflection, i've decided that i'm done following politics, voting, posting on blogs, or going to this website. (although i might stick around to make snarky replies to the comments in this diary)

Now, before anyone says "Who the hell are you?", don't worry, I feel the same way myself, myself!

It seems pretty obvious to me that democracy is a sham and the corporate oligarchy controls everything, there's no difference between the two major political parties and i'm just a random 20 something going up against vested corporate interests with thousands of professional full time lobbyists and consultants with full time jobs making sure that the fat cats get everything they want-- but it just now occurred to me yesterday, who cares?

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday March 09, 2010 · 7:06 PM PST

2010/03/09 · 19:06

Ezra Klein is satisfied with the Senate bill.

"Insurance companies win," [...] tweeted last night. "Time to kill this monstrosity coming out of the Senate."

This was, for progressives, a frustrating vote. But the flip side of it being morally unconscionable for Joe Lieberman to put the bill at risk over something as small as Medicare buy-in for 3-or-so million people is that the absence of Medicare buy-in -- and of the weak public plan -- is not reason enough to oppose the bill, either.

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday January 18, 2010 · 9:18 PM PST

2010/01/18 · 21:18

On this site and lots of other places, I've seen tons of explanations, narratives, about why Coakley is (per the polls) losing the Massachussets senate race:

"She's uninspiring, and has run a generic, horrible campaign." (can be said of 99.9% of politicians including Scott Brown, but they still win elections fine.)

"She forgot to campaign in December" (really?)

"Series of gaffes" (Which would bearly even notable if not for the media narrative surrounding her inexplicable demise.)

"Massachusetts voters are just sexist" (possibly the least damaging "explanation" narrative, assuming non-sexist Massachusetts voters who aren't necessarily pulling for Coakley don't take offense at it. )

My take, there may be a little bit to each of these: but aren't the polls themselves a self fulfilling prophecy, since they force people to ask all of the above? I really don't see coakley as THAT bad of a candidate.

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday January 12, 2010 · 8:36 AM PST

2010/01/12 · 08:36

I remember following Harold Ford's senate race in Tennessee back in '06, and i distinctly remember being completely unable to tell the difference between his platform and a republican's. So I can't say i was terribly unhappy when his was the one tossup seat we didn't win.

But what I don't remember is him being stupid.

If Harold Ford isn't stupid, he should know that a "carpetbagging" conservative from Tennessee will never win the overwhelmingly liberal New York primary, no matter how much money he spends. But now that I think about it, he'd fit right in with the "moderate" republican party of New York, wouldn't he?

And considering that all the pundits say that 2010 is going to be a republican year, and with Rudy Giuliani bowing out of the race, he'd might think he'd have better luck running against Gillibrand as a Republican than as a Democrat.

Poll

87 votes Show Results

Will Harold Ford switch parties to run against Gillibrand as a Republican?

87 votes Vote Now!

Will Harold Ford switch parties to run against Gillibrand as a Republican?

Yes

25 votes

62 votes

Don't let this crap divide us.

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday December 16, 2009 · 9:30 PM PST

2009/12/16 · 21:30

Look, There's definately some reasonable debate to be had on whether the bill in congress is better or worse than nothing. I think we can have this debate without resorting to namecalling or accusations of treason or forming a circular firing squad.

Paul Krugman thinks its still worth passing. So does Nate Silver, and obviously Barack Obama.

Howard Dean thinks the bill should be killed, so does Markos and Bernie Sanders. I think it ought to be killed too, but what the hell do I know (full disclosure: I am a random 20 something from Texas with no relevent expertise in this issue whatsoever). But all these people I respect think different things, so it seems like Lieberman has us all right where he wants us...

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday December 02, 2009 · 9:15 AM PST

2009/12/02 · 09:15

We set a date for withdraw in Iraq and it certainly did NOT embolden our enemies. Just a fluke, right, John McCain?

No, not really. The following dialog should be (over)simple enough that even a brain-dead neocon could figure it out:

Terrorist1: NOW'S A GOOD TIME TO BLOW OURSELVES UP FOR ALLAH, THE AMERICANS HAVE SHOWN WEAKNESS!!!!!!!***
Terrorist2: why kill ourselves if they're leaving anyway?
Terrorist1: ...

Ignoring the fact that much of the Taliban rank and file actually fights because the taliban is the only good-paying job in town. Hopefully, with this surge and new strategy, the better money will be on our side, so the incentives for these people will be reversed.

With a surge comming and a promise of withdrawl, neither the ideological Taliban nor the Need-a-Job-Taliban have reason to do anything other than bunker up or go home. They're not going to see any reason to try to fight 30,000 additional troops when we're leaving anyway.

***Over the top, I know. And if any terrorist really did think like this, wouldn't he already be dead?

Poll

74 votes Show Results

Will you vote for Obama if we're still in Iraq or Afghanistan in Nov 2012?

74 votes Vote Now!

Will you vote for Obama if we're still in Iraq or Afghanistan in Nov 2012?

Yes, I trust Obama's judgement.

49 votes

Yes, because President Sarah would be GREAT NEWS for JOHN MCCAIN!!!

9 votes

Only if he manages to pass healthcare or cap and trade or some other priority

5 votes

No, how could I ever trust anything he says?

9 votes

No, he'd be no better than a republican.

2 votes

HR 3200: the public option won't happen until 2013

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday October 17, 2009 · 2:26 PM PDT

2009/10/17 · 14:26

Yes, I've diaried this before. And I'll probably diary it again.

here's our problem:

http://www.opencongress.org/...

(25) Y1, Y2, ETC- The terms ‘Y1’ , ‘Y2’, ‘Y3’, ‘Y4’, ‘Y5’, and similar subsequently numbered terms, mean 2013 and subsequent years, respectively.

So, whenever you look through the (dense, wall of text) health care bill and see, "Y1", it means that whatever provision it is describing does not go into effect until 2013.

Poll

88 votes Show Results

I want health care reform

88 votes Vote Now!

I want health care reform

in 2009

43 votes

in 2010

35 votes

in 2011

4 votes

in 2012

0 votes

in 2013

6 votes

Where will you be in 2013?

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday October 08, 2009 · 11:00 PM PDT

2009/10/08 · 23:00

So as I'm driving down the road in my shiny new Porsche, enjoying the breezy 65 degree Texas February weather, whispering dirty secrets to my absolutely gorgeous wife(uh, what should I name her...) "Becky", I'll be listening to the news on my futuristic voice activated computerized-semi-sentient car radio, and I'll hear something quite, uh, quaint.

I hadn't really cared about politics since I was completely disillusioned sometime in Mid 2010. I stopped following it at all after I got my cushy 250k a year job, but something on the radio struck a familiar tone.

"Deadline approaching for Implementation of Public Option for Health Care".

"Public Option"? I've heard that phrase before, haven't I?... somewhere in my distant political past. Ah, now I remember. I used to be a liberal, didn't I? Wow, I was really for the public option, wasn't I? Way back when? It seems so long ago....

Poll

73 votes Show Results

Where will you be in 2013?

73 votes Vote Now!

Where will you be in 2013?

Canada!

17 votes

Dead, for lack of decent healthcare!

28 votes

Still on DailyKos, fighting for what's right!

28 votes

Sen Rockefeller's "public" "option" is a poison pill.

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday September 29, 2009 · 11:45 AM PDT

2009/09/29 · 11:45

The First thing I'd like to say, is I'd like to thank Sen. Rockefeller for standing up and telling the truth about Max Baucus' garbage health care bill. He should be commended for standing up for the principle of a Public option, and pointing out just how much of a sell-out the Baucus plan is. I can't claim to know if his amendment is garbage on purpose or whether it just came out that way.

Now, I know he's only doing this to increase his progressive gravitas, to soften the blow for when he stabs us in the back utterly and completely on climate change. Don't worry, we know it's coming, Sen. Rockefeller. It won't be a surprise, at all. I probably shouldn't even characterize it as back-stabbing, as that would imply some degree of surprise or prior record of progressiveness on Climate Change issues.

Nobody expects a senator from West Virginia to support real climate change legislation. We expect the opposite. We know that when you talk about protecting healthcare for coal miners, Sen. Rockefeller, you're going to keep defending those same miners against those who want to put a stop to their pollution. But here's what I didn't expect:

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday September 13, 2009 · 6:44 PM PDT

2009/09/13 · 18:44

Here's the club for growth ad:

_____________________________________________________________________
title=
_____________________________________________________________________

So I've seen this Ad on Dailykos twice today. I realize it's a google ad, so club for growth didn't explicitly buy ads for this site. But there are ways to specifically block specific sites from your google ad list.

of course the ad is complete nonsense... It has been thoroughly debunked here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

Nathan45

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday September 02, 2009 · 5:05 PM PDT

2009/09/02 · 17:05

Some have suggested that a health care bill with no public option would be fine as long as it mandates universal coverage and forces insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions. I think that forcing insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions is a terrible idea that opens a whole can of worms. I think that the only sensible way to cover people with bad pre-existing conditions is with a "buy into medicare"-style public option, which is why a public option is absolutely necessary.

First: it's clear that if you are going to mandate insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions, you would also have to mandate costs.

Otherwise, it's pointless: they'll charge some ridiculous rate which would for all practical purposes prevent you from getting health care.
Any sensible mandate to insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions must involve government mandated price controls. but what is a pre-existing condition, anyway?

Newer
Older

RSS

I'm back, Baby! And I'm voting for Rick Perry!

GBCW

Remove mandate, or kill this bill

Analyzing a Polling Death Spiral -- Polls drive the narrative in MA?

Pure Speculation: Harold Ford to switch parties?

Don't let this crap divide us.

Setting a date for withdraw will do the opposite of "Embolden our enemies"

HR 3200: the public option won't happen until 2013

Where will you be in 2013?

Sen Rockefeller's "public" "option" is a poison pill.

Misleading garbage Club for Growth ad. Now on Dkos.

Why forcing insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions is a terrible idea.