Too bad for the US the first woman presidential candidate has to be Billary, who couldn't be where she is today without her faithless husband. Too bad the first woman to be a candidate for president of the United States is not a woman who could rise to the job on her own merits and not thanks to a crooked political machine and corrupt corporate media.
Obamacare was Romneycare first and that's why the Supreme Court won't kill it. The only reason it's been a "success" is because of the subsidies. Without them it would be a bust. That shows the bankruptcy of it. Of course you're right that a single payer system would be preferable. There would be no need for subsidies. The fact is Obama made backroom deals with Big Pharma to get Obamacare. It was as much as he could get with Big Pharma in control of our health. Its profits would be ensured on the backs of working people in desperate need of coverage. As it is, people are being coerced to buy this overpriced insurance on pain of paying a penalty at tax time. Some are deciding the penalty is worth it because they don't want to pay through the nose for the plans. Obamacare is a fraud and its "success" is not at all a sure bet, what with so many Americans still uninsured because there's nothing affordable about it. If plan prices keep going up, people will start abandoning it because they can barely afford the premiums now, even with the subsidies.
It's not that US companies trust the US government too much. They work hand in hand with the government. All their protestations are just an act to maintain the appearance of independence. The government has co-opted all the companies. They give the government what it wants because the government portrays it as their patriotic duty--they're doing it for their country.
I don't believe for a moment the US didn't know about these airstrikes. What a load of hypocrisy. There's nothing the UAE and Egypt would do without US consent or direction. It's just that with intervention in Syria looming, the US can't be seen as having its hand in too many places in that region.
Where is your criticism of Obama in this? If Bush or any other Republican were president, you would be hammering him nonstop. Obama is presiding over this massacre of Palestinians, but you are soft-pedaling his role in acquiescing to Israel. This shows your Democratic Party bias. It doesn't matter who is president. Israel does what it wants and the U.S. is silent. As long as this continues, Palestinians suffer because the U.S. is not an honest broker. The Israel lobby is in control regardless of who is in the White House.
I was recently in Turkey and struck by the number of solar panels I saw as I traveled around the country, including a pension I stayed at that had solar-heated water for the rooms. It took a while to get hot water in the shower, but that's a small price to pay. It does appear other countries are leading the way on solar power, and the U.S. needs to catch up.
I don't think disingenuous describes Kerry. It's way more sinister than that. He was told what to say by the Obama administration, and he's just toeing the line. I also disagree that Snowden is popular. I think people are by and large indifferent, clueless or unsympathetic to him.
It's amazing how your Democratic partisanship shows in this piece. The one time you mention Barack Obama, it's to say he could have been blackmailed by the intelligence agencies. I don't think you would have said that about George Bush. You don't want to hold Obama accountable for his actions. You oppose this unrestrained surveillance, but you avoid pointing the finger at the person who's authorized it. Yes, Bush started it, but Obama has continued it and gone further. Your Democratic Party stripes are showing too much.
Too bad for the US the first woman presidential candidate has to be Billary, who couldn't be where she is today without her faithless husband. Too bad the first woman to be a candidate for president of the United States is not a woman who could rise to the job on her own merits and not thanks to a crooked political machine and corrupt corporate media.
Obamacare was Romneycare first and that's why the Supreme Court won't kill it. The only reason it's been a "success" is because of the subsidies. Without them it would be a bust. That shows the bankruptcy of it. Of course you're right that a single payer system would be preferable. There would be no need for subsidies. The fact is Obama made backroom deals with Big Pharma to get Obamacare. It was as much as he could get with Big Pharma in control of our health. Its profits would be ensured on the backs of working people in desperate need of coverage. As it is, people are being coerced to buy this overpriced insurance on pain of paying a penalty at tax time. Some are deciding the penalty is worth it because they don't want to pay through the nose for the plans. Obamacare is a fraud and its "success" is not at all a sure bet, what with so many Americans still uninsured because there's nothing affordable about it. If plan prices keep going up, people will start abandoning it because they can barely afford the premiums now, even with the subsidies.
You lost me at "President Michelle Obama's secretary of state." Otherwise, a great post.
You left out the likeliest reason for his withdrawal: the Bushes told him it's Jeb's turn.
It's not that US companies trust the US government too much. They work hand in hand with the government. All their protestations are just an act to maintain the appearance of independence. The government has co-opted all the companies. They give the government what it wants because the government portrays it as their patriotic duty--they're doing it for their country.
I don't believe for a moment the US didn't know about these airstrikes. What a load of hypocrisy. There's nothing the UAE and Egypt would do without US consent or direction. It's just that with intervention in Syria looming, the US can't be seen as having its hand in too many places in that region.
Where is your criticism of Obama in this? If Bush or any other Republican were president, you would be hammering him nonstop. Obama is presiding over this massacre of Palestinians, but you are soft-pedaling his role in acquiescing to Israel. This shows your Democratic Party bias. It doesn't matter who is president. Israel does what it wants and the U.S. is silent. As long as this continues, Palestinians suffer because the U.S. is not an honest broker. The Israel lobby is in control regardless of who is in the White House.
I was recently in Turkey and struck by the number of solar panels I saw as I traveled around the country, including a pension I stayed at that had solar-heated water for the rooms. It took a while to get hot water in the shower, but that's a small price to pay. It does appear other countries are leading the way on solar power, and the U.S. needs to catch up.
I don't think disingenuous describes Kerry. It's way more sinister than that. He was told what to say by the Obama administration, and he's just toeing the line. I also disagree that Snowden is popular. I think people are by and large indifferent, clueless or unsympathetic to him.
It's amazing how your Democratic partisanship shows in this piece. The one time you mention Barack Obama, it's to say he could have been blackmailed by the intelligence agencies. I don't think you would have said that about George Bush. You don't want to hold Obama accountable for his actions. You oppose this unrestrained surveillance, but you avoid pointing the finger at the person who's authorized it. Yes, Bush started it, but Obama has continued it and gone further. Your Democratic Party stripes are showing too much.
What you say here about a US diplomatic facility being used as cover for intelligence purposes applies to Benghazi, Libya. Read Seymour Hersh's fine piece of investigative journalism in the London Review of Books at http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line