Oh Shit ... Here we go ...

[DeistPaladin]

Which is why the democrats must actively oppose them....and hope that enough independents understand that if they don't get on board real soon these fuckwit fascists will soon reduce everyone to serfdom.

Well, that's certainly the ideal scenario, that the Dems grow a pair, and a spine. Right now, they seem pretty committed to their "be Republican-lite and hope we pick up the independent voters" strategy. The problem is independent voters don't vote. Roughly 50% of American voters sit on their asses on election day, and most of those are the moderates and undecideds. The key is to fire up your base. Republicans know this. That's why they keep winning.

[Minimalist]

I disagree. The independents who do vote provide the margin.

That's why one can only hope that these fascist fuckheads keep moving to the right....to scare the independents into getting off their asses.

[Faith No More]

It's true the independents usually provide the difference, but the problems with the Democrats lately is their base is becoming disenfranchised and apathetic. If they do not fix this, then it is entirely possible that no amount of independents will do any good.

[Minimalist]

their base is becoming disenfranchised and apathetic.

We have nowhere else to go. There is no way I would vote for any of the fascist fucks seeking the republican nomination and refusing to vote is simply helping the fascists.

[Faith No More]

their base is becoming disenfranchised and apathetic.

We have nowhere else to go. There is no way I would vote for any of the fascist fucks seeking the republican nomination and refusing to vote is simply helping the fascists.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. I'm just not sure everyone else feeling alienated feels the same.

[Minimalist]

[Anomalocaris]

I haven't even read the OP, but I think almost all of religion in establishing a political platform is almost entirely for posturing and plays little to no part in their actual administration.

Bullshit. Even if the politician is cunning enough to see religion as the tool to ingratiate, fool and corral the more gullible of the masses, once he adopts religion as significant parts of his platform, his career interest would henceforth be served by ostentatiously inconveniencing and thwarting the rational and enlightened, in order to curry favor with the pious and the idiots.

Religion is a poison that is toxic when taken in any form.

[everythingafter]

In his style of premature compromise, before even arriving at the negotiation table, he gave away single payer hoping, apparently, to score points with such a magnanimous concession. ...

Fair enough, but I'm of the persuasion that at least it's a start, which is more than any other president has been able to do. It wasn't like the majorities he had were overly advantageous since he couldn't even get support from some in his own party (the Blue Dogs) for some or all of the provisions you mention.

At the end of the day, he took the massive majorities we gave him, squandered it all on his pursuit of "bipartisanship" and threw us under the bus in the process.

I think he went into office a little to naive about how hard it would be to get anything done with all the Reps and some moderate Dems working against him at every turn, and about the premature compromise stuff, he knew full well that because of the Blue Dogs and the Reps, he wouldn't be able to get the public option and the single payer stuff in there. It just wasn't going to happen. So while I'm not satisfied with the bill that we were left with, it's a start. To go from the current health care system, of which most of Washington's leaders benefit from kick backs and contributions from the industry, to something resembling that of the UK or the Netherlands in one president's term is putting the cart before the horse, I'm afraid. It simply wasn't a realistic expectation in my view.

[Minimalist]

True. We have the best government that money can bribe, E-A.

[tackattack]

I haven't even read the OP, but I think almost all of religion in establishing a political platform is almost entirely for posturing and plays little to no part in their actual administration.

Bullshit. Even if the politician is cunning enough to see religion as the tool to ingratiate, fool and corral the more gullible of the masses, once he adopts religion as significant parts of his platform, his career interest would henceforth be served by ostentatiously inconveniencing and thwarting the rational and enlightened, in order to curry favor with the pious and the idiots.

Religion is a poison that is toxic when taken in any form.

Very valid point. I see how that could lock them into a course of action. Why are almost all politician connotatively understood to be crooks not saints then?