^Speaking for myself..
Yes. Then there could be a discussion about what values and priorities a nation should have, and which ways would be the best ways to go about reaching those values/priorities. Instead, it's about tribal power.
My feeling is that the value system underlying Republican policy is that there should be an economic system that actively rewards the winners and actively punishes the losers, as well as maintaining a social system that empowers and encourages authoritarian social structure to encourage and promote certain ideals of social "normality".
I think it's a fair debate to see if people agree if those values are ones they share or not. (FWIW I don't think that every Republican actively thinks that. I actually think most care little past, again, tribalism. Making sure our money keeps on flowing but the other guy's doesn't)
Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserveThat's standard discourse!
But you know, it's all the things you can't measure that I worry about America. Other than improving healthcare more, I would like to see a lot of work done on the education system. I saw hints of it in Obama's speech.
They are the party of no. They have voted in lockstep against everything the Democrats propose, including things that Republicans introduced earlier. Have some data.
Number of filibusters by congress
◊
Filibusters of non-controversial nominees
(64 were pending in March)
A few bills voted along party lines:
ARRA
: 3 Republican votes
DREAM act
: 3 Republican votes
Tax credits for small businesses (!)
: 2 Republican votes
Kagan's confirmation
: 5 Republican votes
Continuing unemployment compensation
: 2 Republican votes
And of course the Affordable Care Act
: Exactly zero Republican votes
edited 26th Jan '11 11:40:43 AM by jewelleddragon
But that's "putting nations on a pedestal". The post you were responding to simply talked about pointing out other nations doing better in order to spur us toward technological advancement.
In other words, precisely what happened in the space race. I'd say that that was quite a resounding success.
If anything, the current problem is that we don't have a conveniently-mentally-packaged common enemy to unite against.
^
I can't help but agree, and I'm not a huge fan of Carter.
Then again I don't think people give that same sort of Credit to Bush Jr. I loathe Bush Jr. but September 11th was one big shit sandwich, and as president he had to take a big ol' bite. There's no way to do that without making some unpopular decisions and some mistakes. Though that's not a good excuse for all the things he did, he still made lots of mistakes, but for anyone who was old enough to remember the political climate in the direct aftermath of September 11th, our entire nation wanted blood, so yeah, going into Afghan was a very popular decision at the time.
edited 26th Jan '11 5:38:37 PM by Barkey
If he had just gone into Afghanistan, we wouldn't be having as many problems today.
edited 26th Jan '11 7:38:43 PM by storyyeller
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's PlayIt referenced the pakistani floods which is recent. Whether it is bin laden or not is the real question but the problem is that every intelligence agency has an different agenda when it comes to him being alive. CIA would benefit if bin laden were alive to receive extra funding which they can funnel into whatever they want, considering their very limited oversight from congress. The european intelligence agencies would be more concerned with homegrown issues and domestic terrorism but they might benefit somewhat from bin laden's existence. However, the more socialist the government, the less they'd want him to be alive because they don't want to spend resources into military exercises. Unfortunately when it comes to intelligence issues, conspiracy theories are all you have.

What we have to watch out for is saying no for purposes other than doing the right thing.
edited 26th Jan '11 9:20:50 AM by FrodoGoofballCoTV