Obama Video Address: May 16, 2009

There is one key difference between the health care reform efforts of Barack Obama and those of Hillary Clinton in the early to mid 90’s. Bill Clinton presided over an economic boom in this country and his wife was never able to galvanize the necessary support to make health care reform succeed. We are not in a boom right now. President Obama has successfully linked the need for health care reform to our economy’s health.  It is not just that so many citizens are uninsured. Our health care system is killing companies which can no longer offer affordable insurance plans to their employees. It has been a major contributor to the downfall of the auto industry.

While this week’s video address does not offer too many specifics, it illustrates that critical link between health care and our economy.

And now the President of the United States of America:


WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

26 thoughts on “Obama Video Address: May 16, 2009

  1. Rutherford cracks me up. Every time Obama does not deliver on campaign promises and stump speeches we’re told by R, “He’s not being hypocritical; he was just THINKING out loud when he said those things”.

    Basically, by following Rutherford’s logic, we have a president above any kind of criticism when it comes to blatant hypocrisy.

    Sounds like good material for an SNL skit. (That is if they actually ever spoofed Obama)



    Obama runs on shutting down Gitmo. With all the hubris in the world triumphantly claims that Gitmo will be shut down in a year. 4 months later, we have no plan for the terrorists, no where to put them and a looming date of their transfer. Obama, egg on his face, begins to back off his promise.

    No, no. He was THINKING out loud when he told us Gitmo WILL be closed in a year.

    Yup, according to Rutherford, Obama is the only President in American history that should be given a complete pass for the things he says because he THINKS out loud. He’s just mulling shit over in his mind, you see.

    What about you Rutherford, were you simply THINKING out loud when you argued for the many things Obama is backing off of? I quoted you word for word, and can do it repeatedly. Or maybe you no longer have to THINK out loud or for that matter at all? Just keep mimicking pro- Obama talk show toads. Who cares if you skip around in a cerebral circle? Defending the very things you so eloquently were against, sometimes within weeks.

    This is what demagoguery can do to a Harvard grad: The man IS the message.

    You’re an intellectual Zombie and an academic yawn.

    Nah. Just kidding. I was just THINKING out loud.

  2. No Crisis Left Behind.
    If your employer could give you the money it spends on the outdated benefit (and FDR sanctioned tax dodge) that is employer supplied healthcare we’d all be better off. Watch how that is twisted into sucking us all into a further eroding nationhood.

  3. Rabbit, not much I can say in support of the gaffe-happy VP.

    As for my analysis of Obama’s decision making process, I must admit seeing you spin my argument back at me through your looking glass actually cracked me up. I have set up a sort of airtight logical system in which Obama can do no wrong, haven’t I? LOL

    OK, my position deserves some rephrasing since your analysis of it has rendered it preposterous.

    I’m not saying that Obama is incapable of hypocrisy. In fact I’m very annoyed at the way he is dragging his ass on “don’t ask, don’t tell”. What I am saying is that the mark of an intellectual is that he weighs all positions and sees both the pros and cons in all positions. I don’t believe you can be an ideologue and an intellectual at the same time. What delights me about Obama is he is not the ideologue conservatives have painted him as. If he sees the folly in a policy he will backtrack.

    The question you have to ask yourself is why should you be so irked if Obama comes around to supporting policies with which you agree? Are you so dead set against him that you don’t want him to ever agree with you so you can keep the argument alive?

    Obama would not be the first President to discover, after getting the job, that his campaign promises aren’t a slam dunk to implement and in fact with access to more information, may turn out to be bad ideas. I don’t see what is so novel about that.

  4. Alfie, if your employer gave you the money they contribute to your health care, how could we be sure you’d spend it wisely?

    I know this idea boils your libertarian blood but part of government’s job is to protect people from themselves.

  5. “While this week’s video address does not offer too many specifics….”

    Would a plan on how we’re going to pay for this health care reform count as “specifics”?

  6. I’ never thought myself a Libertarian R.
    I think I’d be better able to spend the money on A) stimulating the economy and B) making my own healthcare choices.
    The idea you propose doesn’t boil my blood. It makes me want to vomit though. I don’t need or desire a nanny. Can I opt out and leave the bureaucracy free to “help” the weak and pathetic ?

  7. Rutherford, would you be cool with showering with openly homosexual men on a daily basis? That wouldn’t bother you in the least? What about openly gay cliques? No problem?

  8. Rabbit, I guess you’d have to define “openly gay”. If openly gay means that the guy is gonna walk over to me in the shower and grab my wiener, then I think I’d be uncomfortable with that. The trick is, that is not what I expect to happen.

    You’ve been in the military and I have not so you have me at a disadvantage but my guess is the military ain’t a convent for anyone, gay or straight. Folks like to screw. Don’t hetero military guys hook up with their female counterparts? I guess if I bought the premise that gays like to “recruit” I’d be concerned but I think all a gay guys wants is the fully consensual companionship of another gay guy. I don’t see the problem there.

    Now might gays need to be protected from military homophobes who might let them get their head shot off in combat? Perhaps. That would be about the only justification I could find for don’t ask, don’t tell.

  9. How’d we get here ???? Rutherford your closing argument would seem to be the thesis statement supporting “don’t ask don’t tell”.

  10. D.R.,

    Don’t you know that our resident fighting machine by the name of Rutherford knows better than military commanders and generals who say homosexuality is disruptive?

    Rutherford knows all…

  11. ‘I know this idea boils your libertarian blood but part of government’s job is to protect people from themselves.”

    In a fascist government maybe, not a democracy. Besides given the state of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, only an idiot would support nation healthcare.

  12. Rutherford, should the military of spent money on creating separate birthing for women on ships? Following your logic, it should be know big deal for women and men to shower with one another.

  13. Following your logic, it should be no big deal for women and men to shower with one another.

    Rabbit the dynamics are different. Homosexuals are in the minority (I think 10% tops). The average guy wants to screw the average girl especially if they find themselves in a shower together. Just based on the numbers, gay guys have to be much more cautious and selective. I strongly suspect a gay guy needs a lot more than to see you in the shower to want to screw you. He’s been conditioned to not assume the average guy would welcome his advances. So again, I think you’re creating a boogey man here. (I bet the women showering together gives you no problem at all. 😉 )

    Also, isn’t it true that women in the military put up with a huge amount of heterosexual harassment? At least that’s what I’ve heard. By that measure, we should get all the gals out of the military pronto.

  14. uh…what? Are you being serious?

    1. Your saying that a precondition to sexual attraction to a person is somehow positively correlated to how much that person would welcome a sexual advance. Are you just that illogical or does that mean I automatically have a chance with Jennifer Lopez?

    2. Are you saying gay dudes are only attracted to gay dudes? Do you really believe that? Why wouldn’t the average gay dude want to screw the average dude?

    3. Do you really lack that much empathy that you can’t imagine that showering with people that are known to be attracted to your own sex, despite a lack of “advances,” would be at the very least uncomfortable? We’re servicemen, not prisoners.

    4. Your close to making an argument that homosexual men are less promiscuous then heterosexual men. Maybe then you can explain the sick shit going on at rest stops around here.

    Uh…from what I have heard. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

    In all seriousness, I don’t really understand gay dudes. However, i don’t think you do either and your totally talking out of your ass on this one to get around my logic. You have no idea if the dynamics of homosexuality are different then heterosexuality. Dude, you made that shit up.

    As for your innuendo about the Rabbit digging Lesbians, its true, lesbian action drives the Rabbit bananas…..in the make believe world of porno.

    In reality they are very unattractive Janet Reno types. When I was in the service we once had the bright idea that we would go to the local gay bar and try to pick up lesbians. (We we’re 18 and really dumb). I’ll never forget the horror. We almost got beat up by chicks with mullets while being thoroughly disgusted by the illicit behavior of the men in that club. I think we we’re in there for all of 10 minutes.

  15. Dude, you made that shit up.

    LOL no more than you’ve “made up” your conclusion that some gay soldier is gonna wanna plug your butthole while in the foxhole.

    At the risk of exposing my father to ridicule here in the blog, I’ll tell you what he said. My Dad served in Germany during the Korean War (so, no he didn’t see combat). I asked him yesterday during our Memorial Day festivities (to my wife’s horror) “Hey Dad, what do YOU think about gays in the military?” I paraphrase his reply here:

    “Everyone knew there were gays in the army and everyone knew who they were. The only thing anyone was concerned about was whether your “brother” would cover your back in a skirmish and their sexual orientation had nothing to do with it.”

    That was back in the very anti-gay 1950’s. I would venture to guess that the more extreme a situation men are thrown in together, the less their superficial differences matter (e.g. orientation, race, religion). When guys are just trying to keep each other alive against a common enemy, lots of other stuff falls by the wayside.

    Rabbit, what was your experience in the service that would indicate otherwise?

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s