World Politics

[Bala Verde]

Or maybe he could split it between ACORN and AIG, just to be fair.

He could also give it to the GOP. It would be a nice contribution to sort out their problems and see if there is something at the bottom of shallow emptiness. Consider it an attempt at domestic 'democracy building'. A strong opposition is always welcome...

Or even better, he could give Palin a 1m Euro make-over. Although 'National Interest' has a point when it said, if 'Palin is the answer, then what is the question?'

 

[scribe]

To mention just one: relations with Russia have certainly improved recently.

Peace comes about very quietly. An effective stroke of a pen eliminating an anti-ballistic missile program has done wonders to lift unnecessary tension.

Also, have you noticed the lack of rhetoric surrounding Iraq? Obama administration has used a quietly depoliticized the situation there to effectively draw down tension in that front.

Also, notice we are going to engage Iran in talks. What? The first in like a middle-aged lifetime? Maybe it won't prevent them from wholesale movement towards arming themselves with nuclear devices. Is there a way to prevent that? But it just might change the perception and determination of their people against the United States. Just might.....

"We will extend a hand," Mr. Obama said, "if you are willing to unclench your fist."

 

[Anonymous]

State Department response:"Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum — when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes." Ouch!

 

[rhubroma]

The prize was a symbolic gesture, a kind of "vote of confidence" for the change of political rhetoric (and hopefully actions eventually) coming from the mouth of the Leader of the Free World. It's like the coke vs. not-coke ad, where Obama, in the eyes of the world's plebicite and much of its establisment political elite, equals not-Bush and thus the adversary of an America that decides unilaterally to go to war despite the contrary opinions of many nation states.

Obama, in there eyes, represents diplomacy and negotiation, rather than the ideology of "rogue States" and the "either you're with us or against us" geopolitical bipolarity of the republican neocons at the helm over the last eight years or so.

In this sense the Swedish board has decided to, in the tradition of political auspices, desired to bolster the image of a man, who, more than any other figurehead on the planet, has in their eyes the possibility of guiding the course of contemporay events and thus in these times from a conflict riddled world toward one of greater peace.

Obama isn't the first Nobel Peace prize winner to have controversial credentials (one thinks of Arafat in the first instance, among the many others like Kissinger), nor is he the first US president with such issues to have recieved it. For that goes to Teddy Roosevelt in 1904, just following the same president's armed struggle with Spain over Cuba.

So it's often not about the reality of the political figurhead's achievements (as is so common in the dispensing of propagandistic prizes which are, after all, colored with political implications), so much as being about promoting the desireable ideological changes the recipient politically represents, which can, these yes, bring about more peace.

I think the prize is, therefore, simply a vote of confidence in what Obama's presidency represents, especially over that of his two-term predicesor, to the world's peace loving establishment.

So in this sense it is completely justified and, furthermore, a rather bold and intelligent move on the part of the Swedish academy, because now Obama's peace initiatives will have added weight as a result. The only ones who are really going to call this a mockery, are his cynical political rivals that just want to see Obama fail in everything he tries to acheive, even at the expense of saving a world that is rapidly preciptating toward the brink of possible further, an potentially much more devistating, wars. Which is naturally sickening and potentially criminal.

For the entire world, both on the left and on the right, should be at least in Obama's peace settling initiatives, cheering him on whole-heartedly and without reservations. But tell that to idiots like Rush Limbaugh.

Of course, Obama now has to come up with goods. To transform the rhetoric into reality. And this as they say, aint gonna be easy.

 

[Anonymous]

He could also give it to the GOP. It would be a nice contribution to sort out their problems and see if there is something at the bottom of shallow emptiness. Consider it an attempt at domestic 'democracy building'. A strong opposition is always welcome...

Or even better, he could give Palin a 1m Euro make-over. Although 'National Interest' has a point when it said, if 'Palin is the answer, then what is the question?'

I dunno... how about 'who can win a statewide election while rooting out corruption in her own political party and while in office effectively manage an energy producing state'?

I'm still asking the same question only insert Obama for Palin. Republicans shallow and empty? Perhaps.

It's your side's turn to shine. The dems own everything going on now.

'A strong opposition is welcome' and then you take a cheap swipe at Palin? Telling. Strong opposition until someone strong opposes you. Free speech until someone disagrees. How convenient.

 

[racerralph]

I dunno... how about 'who can win a statewide election while rooting out corruption in her own political party and while in office effectively manage an energy producing state'?

I'm still asking the same question only insert Obama for Palin. Republicans shallow and empty? Perhaps.

It's your side's turn to shine. The dems own everything going on now.

'A strong opposition is welcome' and then you take a cheap swipe at Palin? Telling. Strong opposition until someone strong opposes you. Free speech until someone disagrees. How convenient.

There is no "cheap swipe" AT Palin. She IS a "cheap swipe". Defenders of that woman really ought to get it together. What do you think you really know about that woman? She is a victim of the unflattering portrait she created of herself, all by her own hand. She was not at all prepared or equipped for the escalated visibility she was thrust into by the miscalculating McCain camp. And when she began to speak, all of her flaws came out in blazing technicolor. Unfortunately, she also dragged some of the worst qualities out of the American people that she was trying to mobilize. Palin's name shouldn't even be in the national political dialogue. But if her "supporters" think she's still a good candidate for who knows what, then Rock on. Because IMO she will guarantee the next defeat of any future ticket she is a part of. And, I might add that McCain has recently even alluded to such a disaster should she be picked as a party leader in the future. And that's my contribution to "free speech" on that nasty subject matter.

 

[rhubroma]

I dunno... how about 'who can win a statewide election while rooting out corruption in her own political party and while in office effectively manage an energy producing state'?

I'm still asking the same question only insert Obama for Palin. Republicans shallow and empty? Perhaps.

It's your side's turn to shine. The dems own everything going on now.

'A strong opposition is welcome' and then you take a cheap swipe at Palin? Telling. Strong opposition until someone strong opposes you. Free speech until someone disagrees. How convenient.

With Palin it is a swipe at class and culture. She is pitifully unprepared. Basta.

 

[titan_90]

With Palin it is a swipe at class and culture. She is pitifully unprepared. Basta.

To say the least.

The scariest thing about Palin is that she is an Evangelical Nutjob

 

[Anonymous]

With Palin it is a swipe at class and culture. She is pitifully unprepared. Basta.

There is an argument that can be made that would say we have that now.


A strong conservative woman who's pro gun and pro life scares the hell out of you guys. Ok... I get it. I'm just surprised I have not heard the homophobe/bigot language when mentioning her as that seems to be the way to shut down speech the left does not agree with these days.

Her book sales are kicking ass. More political consternation for you guys? BTW, I don't think she's electable but I care to hear what she has to say. Like I said, you don't agree with her points of view so you just trash her. The politics of person destruction. That's how it's done. I understand. It was/is the same with Reagan, Bush, Clinton (Hill and Bill), W Bush, Gingrich, Limbaugh, Hannity, Ann Coulter, Justice Thomas, Condoleeza Rice and on and on and on.

I just hope I don't read you and RRalph bemoaning how politically polarized the US is.

 

[Anonymous]

To say the least.

The scariest thing about Palin is that she is an Evangelical Nutjob

Yeah, people of faith are scary.

 

[titan_90]

Yeah, people of faith are scary.

No, just the crazy fundamentalist which she is. Bring on the Fascists.

 

[python]

i don’t have a dog in who’s american president one way or the other. i honestly couldn’t care less. will just say that the very fact obama got elected at all speaks to the viability and strength of american system. haters of america should take his election as the sign america has eyes and ears and can change. obama is different and in some ways america is not ready for a mutt like him. that said, i don’t see how he deserved the nobel prize. it smacks of a political calculation rather than merit based decision.

one more thought. it may also indicate the impulsive hope many europeans hold for a change in american politics and the frustration we had with the previous guy.

 

[Anonymous]

No, just the crazy fundamentalist which she is. Bring on the Fascism.

Well then by your logic Obama is a Socialist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-_SGGcJu_c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eimIjwWHZfM


See how fun and easy this labeling/namecalling stuff is?

 

[Anonymous]

Getting back to healthcare, I heard about this but did not have time to read it until today. Govt run heathcare in theory sounds good to many... just not the doctors.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=506199#

More evidence the Obama Admin is, um, less than well prepared? Perhaps.

 

[racerralph]

There is an argument that can be made that would say we have that now.


A strong conservative woman who's pro gun and pro life scares the hell out of you guys. Ok... I get it. I'm just surprised I have not heard the homophobe/bigot language when mentioning her as that seems to be the way to shut down speech the left does not agree with these days.

Her book sales are kicking ass. More political consternation for you guys? BTW, I don't think she's electable but I care to hear what she has to say. Like I said, you don't agree with her points of view so you just trash her. The politics of person destruction. That's how it's done. I understand. It's was/is the same with Reagan, Bush, Clinton (Hill and Bill), W Bush, Gingrich, Limbaugh, Hannity, Ann Coulter, Justice Thomas, Condoleeza Rice and on and on and on.

I just hope I don't read you and RRalph bemoaning how politically polarized the US is.

Aw c'mon Scott. Nice attempt at baiting us scaredy cats. I'm a Liberal. I'm not pro gun, but the last thing I am is afraid of guns, it's the people who carry guns that are disturbing(BTW, did you hear of the fate of the gun toting soccer Mom? Ironic R.I.P).Unfortunately, you DON'T "get it" Like all the tea baggers of August, that don't want Gov't involved in our Health Care, I don't want Religion involved in our Gov't. So, she should keep her Faith to herself, unless she wants to be a missionary in a jungle in some far off land. Then there's your "politics of person destruction" Nobody knows those politics better than the Republican party. How McCain was even able to clasp W's hand in 2008 was a mystery to me. W seriously, and traumatically trashed him when he ran against W in the primaries of 2000. And during Clintons presidency, the sole goal of the Republican party, was to trash Clinton. Never mind that he was THE president.
And finally, polarizing the US? That was almost Palin's sole focus during the failed presidential campaign. To stress how different her plain folk's were Vs. the Elitist Democrats. Oh, and as I said before, she destroyed herself, but maybe you missed that. Just check the records.
If you care about what she says, fine. But don't you be disappointed, if not too many people line up with you. Book sales numbers or not.

 

[titan_90]

See how fun and easy this labeling/namecalling stuff is?

You are right labeling and name calling is easy.

As I have stated before I am a former Republican and the main reason that I switched parties is because how the Republican leadership was pandering to the Fundamentalists is this country. Religious Fundamentalism is dangerous whatever it may be, Islamic or Christian it's just different sides of the same coin. I have some of these nuts in my family and they are some of the most bigoted, closed minded and hateful people that I have met.

 

[Bala Verde]

Well then by your logic Obama is a Socialist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-_SGGcJu_c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eimIjwWHZfM


See how fun and easy this labeling/namecalling stuff is?

Like Palin's opposition to earmarks, unless it concerns her own state. Oh wait she opposed the bridge to nowhere when it was killed already before she flip flopped on the issue.

Or like Sarah Palin who spreads the 'oil wealth' derived from 'resources held in common' around in Alaska.

It is indeed very funny.

Getting back to healthcare, I heard about this but did not have time to read it until today. Govt run heathcare in theory sounds good to many... just not the doctors.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=506199#

It's also funny that US doctors make on average 2-3 times more than doctors under a universal healthcare system. If you like efficiency, you slimm down in those areas where the most money 'disappears': 'That's the doctor's pockets'. So I guess there's some opposition against an anticipated pay check cut...

and what do they threaten with? Correct, something that resembles a 'socialist' strike of (un)officially unionized workers...

 

[titan_90]

Getting back to healthcare, I heard about this but did not have time to read it until today. Govt run heathcare in theory sounds good to many... just not the doctors.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=506199#

More evidence the Obama Admin is, um, less than well prepared? Perhaps.

Did you watch the video that I posted in this thread earlier? It's a documentary that was written a produced by an ER doctor. The doctors in the documentary all support a single payer system, along with tort reform.

About the Documentary:
"Produced by an emergency physician (Paul Hochfeld), "Health, Money and Fear" answers three questions about our broken health care non-system. Why does is cost so much? What does it say about us? What can we do about it? While Congress is more focused on the symptom, lack of Universal Coverage, they are ignoring the underlying problem. COST. Unless they address the perverse incentives that drive up cost, the "reform" we are going to get will be more government subsidies so the insurance industry can continue to thrive being central to a dysfunctional health care system that is better at producing profits than health. The elements of the solution must address the elements of the problem: technology, the fear of liability, mass marketing of prescription drugs, the profit motive, chaos in medical records, unrealistic expectatiions, and the multitude of insurance companies that add substantially to cost without contributing anything to health."

He also is a member of the organisation Mad As Hell Doctors.

 

[Anonymous]

Like Palin's opposition to earmarks, unless it concerns her own state. Oh wait she opposed the bridge to nowhere when it was killed already before she flip flopped on the issue.

Or like Sarah Palin who spreads the 'oil wealth' derived from 'resources held in common' around in Alaska.

It is indeed very funny.



It's also funny that US doctors make on average 2-3 times more than doctors under a universal healthcare system. If you like efficiency, you slimm down in those areas where the most money 'disappears': 'That's the doctor's pockets'. So I guess there's some opposition against an anticipated pay check cut...

and what do they threaten with? Correct, something that resembles a 'socialist' strike of (un)officially unionized workers...

Ok, now I'm officially blown away. Uh, where to start? Let's see, folks coming out of med school owing $500,000 before they start working, the first thing they have to do is buy med/mal insurance at high $50k a year and they don't even enter the job market until they are in their late 20's.

To whine about how much money a doctor makes might be the silliest thing I've read on any thread in this forum. If there is a field that ever needed to attract the best and brightest it is the medical profession. You better hope if you need a neurosurgeon, or a cardio/pulmonary specialist he/she is making more the $38,500 a year. I'm going to be VERY INTERESTED to see the results of Obamacare if 1/3 of the doctors leave a field that is already understaffed.

BTW, I don't know what you do for a living but maybe you ought to take a healthy pay cut... I mean for the good of the people. Holy cow.

Reply if you want to but there remains no basis for you and I to debate.

 

[Anonymous]

Did you watch the video that I posted in this thread earlier? It's a documentary that was written a produced by an ER doctor. The doctors in the documentary all support a single payer system, along with tort reform.

He also is a member of the organisation Mad As Hell Doctors.

I have seen the video.

If you read the IBD poll then those results ought to, at the very least, get your attention.

 

[titan_90]

I have seen the video.

If you read the IBD poll then those results ought to, at the very least, get your attention.

I will read the article when I have time later tonight.

 

[titan_90]

Ok, now I'm officially blown away. Uh, where to start? Let's see, folks coming out of med school owing $500,000 before they start working, the first thing they have to do is buy med/mal insurance at high $50k a year and they don't even enter the job market until they are in their late 20's.

To whine about how much money a doctor makes might be the silliest thing I've read on any thread in this forum. If there is a field that ever needed to attract the best and brightest it is the medical profession. You better hope if you need a neurosurgeon, or a cardio/pulmonary specialist he/she is making more the $38,500 a year. I'm going to be VERY INTERESTED to see the results of Obamacare if 1/3 of the doctors leave a field that is already understaffed.

BTW, I don't know what you do for a living but maybe you ought to take a healthy pay cut... I mean for the good of the people. Holy cow.

Reply if you want to but there remains no basis for you and I to debate.

Yeah, student loans suck as do Malpractice insurance rates.

Doctors have a very demanding and stressful job to say the least. So I think they should earn a very good wage. There are areas is our current system that can be cut that doesn't do anything to improve the healthcare in this country just raises the cost like private insurance(I understand you work in this field and have an interest in preserving it). But we can probably both agree on major Malpractice reform is needed badly.

 

[Bala Verde]

Ok, now I'm officially blown away. Uh, where to start? Let's see, folks coming out of med school owing $500,000 before they start working, the first thing they have to do is buy med/mal insurance at high $50k a year and they don't even enter the job market until they are in their late 20's.

And that is a good demonstration of the fact that your education system is in tatters as well.

To whine about how much money a doctor makes might be the silliest thing I've read on any thread in this forum. If there is a field that ever needed to attract the best and brightest it is the medical profession. You better hope if you need a neurosurgeon, or a cardio/pulmonary specialist he/she is making more the $38,500 a year. I'm going to be VERY INTERESTED to see the results of Obamacare if 1/3 of the doctors leave a field that is already understaffed.

Seems they do a fine job in Europe. They make much less money, but still beat the US in all the overall 'health rankings'. It is then indeed very silly to question how much someone makes.

The best and the brightest will still be attracted with lower compensations. Do you really believe that someone becomes a medical doctor just because of the amount of money one makes? I think one needs to have some affinity with people, the human body, physics, biology and chemistry in the first place. They won't be that easily dissuaded from becoming a doctor and instead ponder over careers as a history teachers, a sales representatives or a CEOs.

Oh and guess what, many will even become doctors REGARDLESS of how much they would be making anyway. Ever heard of that concept, doing something because you're passionate? Look at the amount of people who still become teachers, although they get paid scratch with zero long term prospects.

Doctors in the US seem to be very well off with the income they generate now, and manage to pay off all of their loans. Perhaps even easier than those who got degrees in say French literature? So a cut in wages would not end the world of the medical profession. On top of that, it could actually inspire them to be a little more frugal and efficient in their practices. It's not like all doctors are saints when they submit claims for procedures the executed and you could hardly argue that they are always operating as effciently as possible. If this could contribute to delivering health care to all of those who need it... isn't that part of the reason that one is a doctor, to heal the sick?

And I wonder, if 1/3 of the doctors quits (if you seriously believe that), are they all so close to the retirement age of what 60/63/65/67? If they are not, how could they retire early without severe financial consequences.... Are they perhaps earning too much?

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, student loans suck as do Malpractice insurance rates.

Doctors have a very demanding and stressful job to say the least. So I think they should earn a very good wage. There are areas is our current system that can be cut that doesn't do anything to improve the healthcare in this country just raises the cost like private insurance(I understand you work in this field and have an interest in preserving it). But we can probably both agree on major Malpractice reform is needed badly.

Could not agree more, however one can't just lay all of this at the feet of the insurance industry. Doctors have been screaming for tort reform for years but trial lawyers have a very strong lobby. Insurance rates are a reflection of pay-outs.

Don't mis-understand. There are problems on the insurance side, no doubt. IMO, insurace began going off the tracks with the advent of the HMO. Insurance used to be "major-medical".. in other words Catastrophic Coverage. But the things are now insurance policies are structured to cover all or nearly all medical service interactions. That's like having an auto insurance policy with no deductible and no ability to have a higher deductible to lower your rate. The way health insurance is set up right now is, frankly, stupid. IMHO, of course

 

[titan_90]

And that is a good demonstration of the fact that your education system is in tatters as well.

The education system here in the US needed to be completely reformed from the ground up. As TRDean stated earlier in this thread that too many people in this country have no respect for education at all, we must start here. Then a major overhaul of the public education system. Also, IMHO anyone that wishes to attend a state university should have their tuition paid for by the government.