<p>take it easy on the hoove-meister...he just wanted to chill and be president, and you really can't expect the man to have known how to combat some crazy, unprecedented economic anomaly causing everyone to direct their bitterness with the situation towards him and expect him to magically solve the problem (WW2 turned out to be the economic panacea, NOT FDR's New Deal, which simply raised morale).</p>
<p>Warren Harding definitely had the saddest presidency of all.</p>
<p>"Why do you think your national health care will work in the US, after it has failed in Europe?"</p>
<p>What? How has it failed in Europe? Why don't you do some research on the health care system in Denmark (or the rest of the Nordic countries, for that matter,) and then please explain how it has "failed." How a system where every person has free access to health care be a failure? Perhaps you're just talking about a few specific countries in Europe, but really, I don't see how it can even be argued that the current US health care is better than Europe's.</p>
<p>Sorry for hijacking...I just don't see where this poster is coming from.</p>
<p>itchytorso,</p>
<p>Yes, everyone has access to free health care, but have you ever wondered why people come from Canada to the US to have surgery? It isn't because our doctors are better...For small things, free health care is great, but when you need an emergency heart transplant, it is terrible because there are long, long waiting lists. Not to mention the fact that universal health care takes a MASSIVE chunk out of the budget, and for people who say that they want to balance the budget, it just doesn't make sense. I'm sure they'd cut military spending and raise taxes to do so, but quite a few people believe that is the absolute wrong thing to do as raising taxes would damage the economy, but that is all a matter of opinion.</p>
<p>Why do you change your position on issues so many times?</p>
<p>made4uchicago,</p>
<p>But itchytorso was talking about health care in EUROPE...not Canada.</p>
<p>Quote: altectech thank you for voicing my complaint fully. that woman is an evil, conniving personification of SATAN!</p>
<p>Source: Texas</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
I mean, seriously...Obama is right..it's time for change. The US is not a bloodline-democracy.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>So, you wouldn't vote for her because of her last name? Change is great, but Obama not only lacks experience, but he lacks substantial plans and opinions.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Ann Coulter is funny...the fact that you hate her so much actually proves that.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>You're right, I shouldn't have said that. Arguing against her makes it seem like her "opinions" have some validity. She doesn't believe a word she says.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Yes, everyone has access to free health care, but have you ever wondered why people come from Canada to the US to have surgery?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>I'm a Canadian citizen (living in America, but that's irrelevant). Canadians love socialized medicine. That's the only point on which Michael Moore was ever right.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Warren Harding definitely had the saddest presidency of all.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Although I love FDR, I'd have to agree with you about how Hoover wasn't horrible. Still, there are numerous presidents I can think of besides Harding for the "Worst President" award. Examples: Andrew Jackson, Benjamin Harrison, Ronald Reagan</p>
<p>"I find it amusing when people hate her for the most arbritrary and pointless reasons."</p>
<p>at least a quarter of her votes come solely from the notion of "i want a woman president".</p>
<p>there are far too many voters who "feel" candidates as opposed to thinking about them and their positions.</p>
<p>How does she plan on improving the economy?</p>
<p>BTW, I think she will be a great leader. We need a cunning, two faced female dog to take on the other cunning, two faced world leaders from Iran, Russia, Syria, etc. She will not try to appease them like Obama, and she will not be egged on into another war like McCain.</p>
<p>The United States is in another "Cold War" and we need someone who will smile while holding a dagger behind their back. Hillary is the only one of the three that can do it!</p>
<p>BTW, I have always despised her, but I think the time is right for her. I don't like her, but I am going to vote for her in March! She is stronger on foreign policy than Obama and McCain!</p>
<p>
[/quote]
"Why do you think your national health care will work in the US, after it has failed in Europe?"</p>
<p>What? How has it failed in Europe? Why don't you do some research on the health care system in Denmark (or the rest of the Nordic countries, for that matter,) and then please explain how it has "failed." How a system where every person has free access to health care be a failure? Perhaps you're just talking about a few specific countries in Europe, but really, I don't see how it can even be argued that the current US health care is better than Europe's.</p>
<p>Sorry for hijacking...I just don't see where this poster is coming from.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>HOKAY, since you did hijack and specifically called me out, I have no problem defending my point. Made4uchicago basically hit the main points of the argument (thanks hah), but yeah, it has failed if people can't get life-saving surgeries when they need them. I'm thinking specifically England, where most people end up having to pay for private surgery anyway. I think a system has failed when 1) people can't use the service for its most basic purpose (health insurance to prolong their life) 2) most people opt out 3) costs tons of money. Additionally, have you read the papers? England is proposing a law that would deny life-saving treatments to people deemed old, insane, etc because of overcrowding. Additionally, I reread your post and you say to look up the Nordic countries, fine...there might be perfectly valid systems that everyone loves (not being sarcastic), but there still has been health care failures in Europe. My question is perfectly valid to Hilary-"Why do you think your health care system will work, after it has failed in Europe", I never said that every country failed, merely that there were failures and how she intends to avoid that. In fact, my question is even more valid, if her position was that she would make the US like the Nordic systems (your argument). So that's where I was coming from! :)</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
at least a quarter of her votes come solely from the notion of "i want a woman president".
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Hmm...that's interesting. Would you please remind me what percentage of the African-American vote Obama gets?</p>
<p>
[quote]
take it easy on the hoove-meister...he just wanted to chill and be president, and you really can't expect the man to have known how to combat some crazy, unprecedented economic anomaly causing everyone to direct their bitterness with the situation towards him and expect him to magically solve the problem (WW2 turned out to be the economic panacea, NOT FDR's New Deal, which simply raised morale).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Coolidge is to blame for most of it. Regardless, hoover was still a ****ty president.</p>
<p>What does she plan to do with education problems? Such as testing, funding for schools and teachers, etc?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quote:
I mean, seriously...Obama is right..it's time for change. The US is not a bloodline-democracy.
So, you wouldn't vote for her because of her last name? Change is great, but Obama not only lacks experience, but he lacks substantial plans and opinions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I didn't say that. However, it is becoming a bloodline-democracy. It's not about experience, it's about who can bring change, and you're probably gonna try and be smart, and say "So anybody could run for president?" but honestly, he has experience, just not as much as Hillary. He hardly lacks opinion; if anything, he's pretty strong on his opinions. He's resented the war since day one, and yet, who flipped their opinion on the war after they realized that it was unfavorable? Clinton. Look, quite honestly, we live at a time where many countries, especially Islamic, will look down on a nation that is led by a woman. It's sad, but it's true. Obama will promote good relations with these countries, and maybe some countries will widen their sight, one day, and accept women leaders.</p>
<p>We can all argue about this, but only time will tell who wins.</p>
<p>"there are far too many voters who "feel" candidates as opposed to thinking about them and their positions."</p>
<p>you (proletariat) obviously didn't read my post, notice the plural of "candidates".</p>
<p>Anon_Person, fair enough. I wasn't trying to call you out--I just wanted to know where you're coming from, and where you got the idea that Europe's health system has failed, especially since I strongly believe that some of the European countries have the best system in the world (that is, if you don't mind paying 63% income tax, 25% VAT, etc.) Anyway, my point really was that nationwide medical care can definitely work under the right circumstances. Sorry if I appeared to be calling you out. Thanks for clarifying.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quote:
at least a quarter of her votes come solely from the notion of "i want a woman president".
Hmm...that's interesting. Would you please remind me what percentage of the African-American vote Obama gets?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Also, could we see a source where this "quarter of her votes" comes from?</p>
<p>FWIW, 82% of black voters voted for Obama.</p>
<p>
[quote]
it has failed if people can't get life-saving surgeries when they need them.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, because life-saving problems are the only ones that pervade people's lives -- not good dental care, or a heart bypass surgery that could greatly improve someone's life, etc. None of that, of course, because everyone in need of health care these days needs a heart transplant, or brain surgery, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
people can't use the service for its most basic purpose (health insurance to prolong their life)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This isn't really how it is everywhere. Thus, it may not be like that in the US.</p>
<p>
[quote]
most people opt out
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Where'd you get that one?</p>
<p>
[quote]
costs tons of money
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hmm, so most governmental programs are failures, then? Such as Medicare, Social Security, educational spending, etc.</p>
<p>Easton 722 wrote: "Look, quite honestly, we live at a time where many countries, especially Islamic, will look down on a nation that is led by a woman. It's sad, but it's true. Obama will promote good relations with these countries, and maybe some countries will widen their sight, one day, and accept women leaders."</p>
<p>Obama wants to appease Islamic countries! Hillary will not nor will McCain! Do you really want the US to bow down to Iran or Syria or Russia, etc? Obama will be batted around like a beach ball by Islamic countries and our enemies, if he is elected.</p>
<p>kyledavid, stop hijacking the thread and go onto a political forum</p>
<p>Obama lacks experience? Did G. W. Bush have experience?</p>