Jump to content

Can He Do All 10?


BillsNYC

Recommended Posts

Can he do it, and are these really the top 10 pledges?

 

http://news.aol.com/main/inauguration/arti...-deliver/309503

 

Lots of this are doable, but I don't see the millions of jobs he's promised on this?

 

Actually, aside from the health care promises, those all seem pretty achievable. And even the "reduce health care by $2500 per family" one...hell, he could probably do that next week, with a good group of creative accountants.

 

Which is why most of those promises are primarily nonsense. As KD pointed out...what the hell does "95% of working families" actually mean? What does it mean to reduce health care costs by $2500 per family? What does "withdraw combat troops from Iraq" really involve (hint: the US military is maybe 75% non-combat troops). These campaign promises, like most political promises, are nothing more than artificially specific, simple. and concrete statements masking the vague, complex, and abstract nature of the problems they profess to address.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm struck by how easily achieved his official top ten promises are, and how meaningless with the exception of one:

 

1. Health care for children. Don't veto the reauthorization of SCHIP and declare victory.

2. Reduce health care costs of typical family by up to $2,500. The operative words are 'by up to.' Any reduction and you can claim 'mission accomplished.'

3. Double the production of alternative energy. You can mandate this - it doesn't matter how expensive of efficient it is.

4. Enact a spending program to strengthen the nations infrastructure. This is a freebie. Every pork-laden bill coming out of congress can be legitimately relabeled an infrastructure spending bill as long as it includes a bridge to nowhere, somewhere, or anywhere inbetween.

5. Cut federal income taxes for 95% of working families. If you are willing to play games with the definitions of '95%' and 'working families,' which are already occuring, this is easy. In fact Bush already did it.

6. Withdraw most troops from Iraq in 16 months. We are up to 'most' and '16 months,' a far cry from the early primaries. We are already on course for that.

7. Increase troops in Aphganistan by two brigades. Ok.

8. Lift restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research. Yawn.

9. Close Guantanamo. A PR move.

 

And finally,

 

10. Make it easier for labor unions to organize. IMO passing the card-check legislation is the only meaningfull promise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm struck by how easily achieved his official top ten promises are, and how meaningless with the exception of one:

 

 

8. Lift restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research. Yawn.

 

This one still gets me. Fact: President Bush is the first president to provide federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. And he put no restrictions on private funding, which is happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one still gets me. Fact: President Bush is the first president to provide federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. And he put no restrictions on private funding, which is happening.

 

People still want this although almost all advances have been with ADULT stem cells and not embryonic stem cells. If you want embryonic stem cells, get them from cord blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one still gets me. Fact: President Bush is the first president to provide federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. And he put no restrictions on private funding, which is happening.

 

That's like saying Clinton supported the internet. Obviously as new technological and scientific discoveries are made, someone will be the first president to support it.

 

And if viable alternatives to embryonic stem cells were proven to work just as well, then this would be a moot point. But until they are, we should support all types of stem cell research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's like saying Clinton supported the internet. Obviously as new technological and scientific discoveries are made, someone will be the first president to support it.

 

And if viable alternatives to embryonic stem cells were proven to work just as well, then this would be a moot point. But until they are, we should support all types of stem cell research.

 

Again - you are one of the "we". Nothing prevents you from sending your own personal check for something you support and believe in, to research institutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if viable alternatives to embryonic stem cells were proven to work just as well, then this would be a moot point. But until they are, we should support all types of stem cell research.

 

No we don't. My money should be used to enhance and go toward things that work. Throwing money into the wishing well is not a good use of my tax dollars.

 

On top of that it goes against a large portion of the peoples religion. Oh I know the people, especially if they don't share your politics, be damned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's like saying Clinton supported the internet. Obviously as new technological and scientific discoveries are made, someone will be the first president to support it.

 

And if viable alternatives to embryonic stem cells were proven to work just as well, then this would be a moot point. But until they are, we should support all types of stem cell research.

 

Weak analogy. Clinton was never successfully portrayed as being against the Internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter. Partisans and lemmings still believe Bill Clinton was somehow responsible for the "terrific" economy of the 1990s, ignoring that the entire thing was a total fallacy and we're going to pay for it for generations to come.

I wasn't big on Clinton or Bush. Both presidencies were built on fallacies. I am still waiting for Obama to close Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.......get to it already, there aren't any more witches...err, terrorists to be found there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't big on Clinton or Bush. Both presidencies were built on fallacies. I am still waiting for Obama to close Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.......get to it already, there aren't any more witches...err, terrorists to be found there.

 

Abu Ghraib was handed over to the Iraqis a couple of years ago. Admittedly, the prison should have been closed and the building levelled years ago...but unless Obama wants to meddle in a soverign Iraqi affair, there's nothing he can do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't big on Clinton or Bush. Both presidencies were built on fallacies. I am still waiting for Obama to close Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.......get to it already, there aren't any more witches...err, terrorists to be found there.

Do you work for the CIA or just watch CNN? Will all your insite you must get daily briefings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...