are you happy with Obama's progress so far?

CCSS2005 said:
WOW!!! That was posted on 8-19-10 and no response from "WAS" what's up need some time to come up with your propaganda ? :grinno::grinno:
Click to expand...

The site's malware is keeping me from visiting and posting much. Once they fix the issue, I'll hop back onto the thread.



CCSS2005 said:
You keep bringing that up. What is this a spokes model for your agenda ? Don't forget if you get sick and need to wait for care, you can always come here to the good old U.S.of A.
Click to expand...

Nope, just a regular person like you and me whom I think you should chat with. I don't need to wait for care in Canada, but thanks for the option, since my government WILL pay for treatment in the USA if I required it. Sorry we can't say the same for your private insurance companies.
 
Rob Tomlin said:
It's going to be interesting (fun) to see the Democrats take a major beating this Tuesday.
Click to expand...



That's my hope. I also hope the Republicans don't become complacent again like they did when Bush was in office.
 
just when i thought the economoy is slowly recovering, it's still continuing to hit rock bottom. enough is enough already... :(
 
WAS said:
The site's malware is keeping me from visiting and posting much. Once they fix the issue, I'll hop back onto the thread.





Nope, just a regular person like you and me whom I think you should chat with. I don't need to wait for care in Canada, but thanks for the option, since my government WILL pay for treatment in the USA if I required it. Sorry we can't say the same for your private insurance companies.
Click to expand...



"Sorry we can't say the same for your private insurance companies"? What does that mean? What do you know about US insurance carriers? If a carrier in the US denies allowing an insured timely treatment, they're toast if the insured's outcome is bad. And you don't "wait for care in Canada"? If you have shortness of breath, can you be in surgery to correct a life-threatening condition in a matter of minutes? I think not.



You can't compare the responsiveness or capability of US healthcare system to any other in the world...but our system is now under attack and may be so regulated that it results in a semi-third world system. SAD.



Mike
 
As long as we do not have a republican president, then the republicans in congress will behave more like what they campaign on rather than how they have behaved when they had the presidency. It is sorta like the joke about the dog chasing the car....why if they caught it they cannot drive.
 
Everyone seems to forget that the Dems have controlled congress since 2006! Every spending bill under the last 2 years of GWB's presidency came from a Democratically controlled congress; George himself couldn't authorize spending a dime, but could only not veto it.



Why are Republicans being blamed for the last 2 years of GWB's tenure? If Barney Frank can claim that Dems weren't in control of Congress when he spoke against the proposed Fannie and Freddie controls in the early 2000s, how can Dems now avoid fault when they WERE in control?



Mike
 
Only a few more days to decide if we're joining France, Greece etc or turning it around and moving toward personal responsibility. Frankly, the whole country needs an enema to get rid of entitlement mentality. Look at Brittain, there're finally realizing that you can't take from those who work and give to those who won't and expect to grow as nation.
 
Rob Tomlin said:
Amen to that.
Click to expand...



IMO, as a person with no interest and time for politics, I feel that the President is not the main one to look at.

It's the powerful people surrounding him.

If he can command respect, compliance and "obedience" from the OTHER powerful people around him who's working under him, and if these people are NOT self-serving, selfish, corrupted people....then we'll see a tremendous improvement.



As for Obama, since this thread is all about him, I feel he is just another poor fella who's challenged by other powerful people in the govt and while many around him appears to be supporting him, they are actually not with him. In the end, when a leader cannot get the fullest cooperation from his people.....he'll just wither away and be seen as incompetent and leading the country into the unknown.



Sorry, I can't substantiate what I say, cos it's only the feelings of a person who has zero interest in politics. It's just my personal gutfeel, and I could be wrong about the man.
 
gigondaz said:
IMO, as a person with no interest and time for politics, I feel that the President is not the main one to look at.

It's the powerful people surrounding him.

If he can command respect, compliance and "obedience" from the OTHER powerful people around him who's working under him, and if these people are NOT self-serving, selfish, corrupted people....then we'll see a tremendous improvement.



As for Obama, since this thread is all about him, I feel he is just another poor fella who's challenged by other powerful people in the govt and while many around him appears to be supporting him, they are actually not with him. In the end, when a leader cannot get the fullest cooperation from his people.....he'll just wither away and be seen as incompetent and leading the country into the unknown.



Sorry, I can't substantiate what I say, cos it's only the feelings of a person who has zero interest in politics. It's just my personal gutfeel, and I could be wrong about the man.
Click to expand...



This sounds like you would prefer a dictatorship over our system of government.
 
MSOsr said:
"Sorry we can't say the same for your private insurance companies"? What does that mean? What do you know about US insurance carriers? If a carrier in the US denies allowing an insured timely treatment, they're toast if the insured's outcome is bad. And you don't "wait for care in Canada"? If you have shortness of breath, can you be in surgery to correct a life-threatening condition in a matter of minutes? I think not.



You can't compare the responsiveness or capability of US healthcare system to any other in the world...but our system is now under attack and may be so regulated that it results in a semi-third world system. SAD.



Mike
Click to expand...

Actually yes, you can be in surgery within minutes if you have a life-threatening ailment. Why some of you Americans think that's not possible in our public health care system, I do not know. For some reason, you seem to think that just because the government handles the payment system, our entire health care is garage and red-taped. I also do not know why some of you believe that making health care universal in the USA will result in a 3rd world system. And before you talk down countries with a smaller GDP than yours, remember that the WHO ranked the USA as 37th in the world for their health care system. Saudi Arabia, Costa Rica and Monaco are among the countries that ranked higher than you.



I've said it before numerous times in this thread, the USA medical system itself is no doubt one of the best in the world. It's your payment system that's screwed up (that's private insurance companies).
 
Rob Tomlin said:
This sounds like you would prefer a dictatorship over our system of government.
Click to expand...



:har:No..that's not what I implied.

Just imagine this:



You own a company that has 50 employees.

Would you prefer to have these 50 employees working WITH you, or would you be happy if 5-10 out of 50 are actually against you, constantly and silently challenging you, "playing with you" and trying to influence the others negatively???

These are the "troublemakers" who generate little and make loads of problems and hindrances for you.



How can you work that way?

How can the company work smoothly and progress?

If outsiders know about this, what would they think of the company's boss...you??



If you hv genuine respect for someone, I don't think you'll be playing his balls behind his back or conspiring to slow him down.



What's needed is a leader who's genuinely respected by all working under him

The problem starts when the No1 man does not have the ABSOLUTE say in everything, and there are lots of opposition who's just challenging him on every single thing.

How to get things done in such an environment, that'll benefit the public??

The poor man will be spending his time proposing and fighting.....and not enough time on generating REAL results that'll impress and benefit the public.



Note:

Look at Bush...IMO...he just forges ahead and do things the way HE wants. Those who opposed him (Powell, McChrystal etc)...look what happened to them.

But too bad he wasted billions in Iraq and Stan. If Bush had been equally adamant in executing the CORRECT things, and spending the billions in the US, on Americans, on health care, housing and other things...I'm sure he could've been a great leader:grinno:
 
gigondaz said:
:har:No..that's not what I implied.
Click to expand...



Actually you did imply it. You may not have meant to imply it, but you did, as shown by saying things like this: "If he can command respect, compliance and "obedience" from the OTHER powerful people around him who's working under him..."



Command compliance and obedience? Sounds like a dictator to me.
 
Rob Tomlin said:
Actually you did imply it. You may not have meant to imply it, but you did, as shown by saying things like this: "If he can command respect, compliance and "obedience" from the OTHER powerful people around him who's working under him..."

Command compliance and obedience? Sounds like a dictator to me.
Click to expand...



I insist that all incoming cars to my shop MUST be clayed, either simply or extensively, before any detailing work commences. No shortcuts.

If my staff do not OBEY me, and insist on skipping the claying process and doing what they feel like doing, then they are DIS-OBEDIENT. I insist that everyone starts work at 8.30am daily. That's my rule as the leader. If anyone doesn't follow, that's non-compliance.

That's what I meant by obedience (following instructions) and compliance (agreeing with decisions).

You want people who can co-operate with you....not troublemakers who intentionally oppose and create problems.



Rob, we could hv a vast diff of opinion here, and I'm not trying to say who's right or wrong:D:D

But to me, as a business owner, my No1 requirement is OBEDIENCE.

Without obedience, nothing gets done as everyone will do what the hell they feel like doing:grinno::grinno:
 
gigondaz said:
I insist that all incoming cars to my shop MUST be clayed, either simply or extensively, before any detailing work commences. No shortcuts.

If my staff do not OBEY me, and insist on skipping the claying process and doing what they feel like doing, then they are DIS-OBEDIENT. I insist that everyone starts work at 8.30am daily. That's my rule as the leader. If anyone doesn't follow, that's non-compliance.

That's what I meant by obedience (following instructions) and compliance (agreeing with decisions).

You want people who can co-operate with you....not troublemakers who intentionally oppose and create problems.



Rob, we could hv a vast diff of opinion here, and I'm not trying to say who's right or wrong:D:D

But to me, as a business owner, my No1 requirement is OBEDIENCE.

Without obedience, nothing gets done as everyone will do what the hell they feel like doing:grinno::grinno:
Click to expand...



Absolutely!



I think we were kind of talking about different things and there was some confusion. I agree with you about a boss/business owner requiring/commanding respect and compliance/obedience.



What I was saying is that the way our government works, you need checks and balances. That means that you will have some opposition from time to time based on disagreements on what is best for the country. That is a very healthy thing. A President who commands "obedience" would be called a dictator by many. But it is a more difficult question when you ask if people who the President selects himself to serve in his administration (i.e, they are not voted in, but are appointed) should be expected to be "obedient". I still say having disagreement and debate is a healthy thing, even (especially?) if it comes from people the President appointed himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top