To compare Obama with Hitler: no comment. Can't say anything else than that the comparison is flawed. Looking out for the minorities, not able to pay for their diseases, is Obama's line. Hitler's line was to kill them off. You will never know which group a newborn will belong to. You want to kill him/her, just for making sure? Or give him/her a good possibility for a good life? I admit America generally isn't stopping individuals, but America isn't helping people either, to an enough extent. How the **** can anyone with an insurance get better treatment than one without? Americans should hate themselves for not even trying to get an insurance covering all the people. Clinton did something for this, then we got Obamacare. W. didn't do a **** for this, just executed prisoners in Texas and bombed as much as he could. And believed in God, poor guy.

Obama and the democrats aren't interested in helping the poor. They are interested in doing whatever it takes to stay in power, don't you understand that? And we aren't doing enough to help the poor??? We have a higher percentage of people receiving aid from the government now than at any time in history. We have gone from a country based on self-reliance, to one where everyone's got their hand out. Why should they try to find work when they can make more by not working and being a heroin addict, and the government will give them health care and meet all their needs from cradle to grave? That's not the mentality that made this country great. And to pay for all this, Obama wants to choke off the very lifeblood of this economy, the millionaires and billionaires that generate the jobs and make the engine of the economy run for both rich and poor. It's evolution in reverse. And it simply isn't true that the poor don't have health care. You go to any hospital in the US with a life threatening emergency, and you will be treated whether you can pay or not. I've got a friend who's broke and has no insurance, and he's had numerous surgeries including brain surgery. Obamacare, if it doesn't fail, which I'm pretty sure it will, will greatly DECREASE the quality of care for everyone because doctors are leaving the system in droves. They want nothing to do with that monstrosity.

You believe in people too little.

Could it be the ****ing religion here again. "The chosen ones". Eliminate religion in a time span of 30 years, until the most brainwashed die of natural causes, and you will have a mature society.

Do you ONLY care about the poor? How about all the middle class that used to have health insurance, and now don't because their policies weren't Obamacare compliant? Now they are being forced by the government to pay for health care which is often several times more expensive or pay a big fine. There's estimated to be 80 million of those. Many will opt to pay the fine and go without health care because they simply can't afford it. Those people were all told outright lies by Obama because he said, "If you like your policy, you can keep your policy". BULL****. Doctors are leaving the health care system in droves because they don't want to deal with the government monstrosity. That will reduce the quality of care for everyone except the very rich who can afford to pay cash. Most likely, it will cause so much outrage that the whole plan will fail.

After posing the question on this forum a couple years ago why any scientifically-minded person would call himself an atheist, it was explained to me that although some will define atheism as a disbelief in God, that's actually the definition of a "hard" atheist. Most atheist, however, admit there is some small probability God could exist, often comparing it to the chance Santa Claus or a flying spaghetti monster exists. See Dawkin's Spectrum of Theistic Probability

Agnosticism, however, refers to knowledge. This means an agnostic would claim not to know God exists. But that is separate from a belief/disbelief in God. This leaves open the possibility one could be agnostic, yet still choose to believe in God, like an Agnostic Theist, for example.

Agnosticism doesn't seem to go far enough for me as a scientifically-minded person. I see no reason to believe in something for which there is little or no evidence, so it makes sense to me to call myself an atheist, but not a strong atheist.

Well.... we shielded you from being swallowed up by the Soviets for much of that time, helping you rebuild from the wars you failed to nip in the bud before they started. Somehow, this passive attitude remained even in the face of your previous failures and you continue to appease dictators and spend next to nothing on your defenses, preferring to rely on us to protect you while you spend that money undercutting your economic systems by paying drunks not to work. Unfortunately, we've taken that charge too far in my estimation. Being World Cop isn't as great as it sounds. For example, we have to hear it from little snots who continue to act like teenage children rebelling against mean ol' Dad who has his kid's best interests in mind, but he just doesn't understand! Whhaaaaaaaahahahah!

Sorry for my ramble, I was drunk for the first time in months. I love you Americans, just concentrated on the weak parts of your state, maybe with no great success. Europe was lost the first half of the 20th century, your democracy saved the world. Thanks!

By the way, my weekly alcohol intake has really gone down to half (except yesterday ) since I talked about it last time, have been averaging about 7 shots a week, sometimes lately up to 10. I'm thinking about giving it up again, just as a sport. Kind of fun to challenge yourself.

I love you guys too. Great culture and women and wine and accents over there! It's okay for loved ones to fight from time to time, as long as it remains verbal. Brings us closer.

US spends double the amount per capita on health care as compared to countries in Europe. With no better results. Just fattening the pockets of some. And leaving others behind.

I'm sorry for the side effects a new system always brings in the beginning though.

Next must be reducing the amounts of arms, get rid of the death penalty, and gradually shorten the prison terms.

I question the wisdom of artificially controlling prices as is done in Europe, which seems likely to result in a decrease in quality of care. I have an aunt who ran the pharmaceutical department at MD Anderson for 15 years (she was in charge of selecting and purchasing the drugs for the hospital) who agrees. She thinks keeping the industry market-driven is the best way to promote innovation, and that price controls only slow that down. Furthermore, the worry that only the rich will be able to afford the best drugs is outweighed by the added benefit of innovation and that prices fall off as patents expire and new drugs are developed. For example, HIV suppression drugs which were at first affordable only to the rich are now much cheaper and treat the masses. Would the world have defeated AIDS as quickly (is this premature?) under a purely socialized system, or would these life-saving drugs still be stuck in development?

Pure socialism can't even be debated, it sucks that bad. But America doesn't have to be that antithesis in used to be. Go for the synthese. From 90-10 to maybe 75-25 on the capitalist/socialist scale.

I agree there should be a happy medium, though I don't know where that is. I'm just pointing out a whole lot of people go around touting the ethics of universal health coverage, claiming everyone should have access to exactly the same healthcare regardless of their wealth without realizing that it could end up causing the system to suffer, and that everyone may end up worse off for it.

What is it about him that makes you think he's trying to be good? He's a mass murderer and is responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity, how can he be "trying to be good" while doing all that? In some states people receive the death penalty for much smaller crimes than his, so as far as I'm concerned he at least deserves a life sentence. I will grant you that Romney would have probably been even worse than Obama. All that guy's missing are horns and a pointy tail.
During his 1st campaign there were some loonies calling him the Antichrist and I think that prediction is looking pretty spot-on, it's an understandable belief to me even though I'm atheist.

As for the Hitler comparison, I don't think it's off by a vast amount. Hitler's atrocities were greater, but besides the exact number of murders, what's the difference between a mass murderer and a mass murderer? At what point are you simply as vile a person as you can possibly be without having to do any more to prove it? Two differences: Hitler was passionate (whereas Obama might be a sociopath*), and from what I understand Hitler wasn't deceitful, he didn't even pretend not to be a monster (I could be wrong about that because there were plenty of Germans who weren't aware of the horrors taking place). Obama goes on TV convincing everyone he's fighting for democratic ideals, then proceeds to kill innocent people on purpose, punish journalists for doing journalism, take away constitutional rights such as due process, and so on.

*Obama doesn't really strike me as a sociopath, it's probably what Hannah Arendt talked about, the banality of evil. It's widespread among those with the opportunity to abuse power.

/////
Anyway, if we want a good president, we need to get the money out of politics. And making the vote tallying software open-source wouldn't hurt either.

you shouldn't put to much weight on one neuron in the brain, or one actor in politic

president is like pfc, it weighs inputs, from all other interested parties and often decides to go the easy route and eat that cupcake since anything that produces long-term utility vs short-term is not relevant (after all he only has 4 years before reelection)

I've always wondered what people are on when they call a democratically-elected president a murderer because he made decisions he was elected to make. In most every case I can think of he was consulted by a staff of military advisers and others who supported his decision, who I suppose are also called evil murderers. Could it be that perhaps there were justifiable reasons for those decisions, like for example those he was aiming at were trying to kill us? Would these hippies who so viciously throw out such insults have a clue how to run a country that provides them the safety they take for granted? If so, why don't they run for president - oh, because they couldn't even get on the ticket since nobody would vote for them.

Read some Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Scahill and then see if I'm just being a hippie. Or because I don't have >1 billion dollars to spend on campaign propaganda, nor would I receive the funding from the corporate rulers. There is only 1 party, the corporate party, "democrat" and "republic" has no substantial difference except maybe which specific corporations each candidate will do favors for.

Sure, that's why we only invade third-world countries who are completely powerless to defend themselves, they're such big threats to us. And these countries are just coincidentally strategic for controlling resources. Again, read Chomsky, he has the facts and citations to back up all of his claims so you won't have to just take his word for it.

If he explicitly ran with a "I'm going to drone 10000 innocent brown people a year along with some bad ones. Murrikkaaaa!!!!" plank, got elected, and did it, is he somehow not a murderer? Your comment makes no sense, and the eager willingness of randoms to blindly suck authority's dick is the glue that holds basically every pathological system in the modern West together.

They apparently all bomb. At least W. did the best he could in that area.

I forgot to respond to this and Tom reminded me. Obama ran on "Change," closing Gitmo, pulling out of the Middle East, environment, among other things. He has done precisely 0 of the things he said he would. That to me is called a hypocrite and a liar. We didn't elect him to any of the things he's doing. And if he were a Republican there would be an uproar, but since he's a Dem, people like you just give him benefit of the doubt that "he must have a good reason" and "his intentions are good".

Where is the democracy when every policy the overwhelming majority of people want, the exact opposite is done?

Tom n HeeHaw (I used to watch that show as a kid, funny). If Obama hasn't changed the things he promised, is there some possibility that it's a bit more complicated than you think? Again, could it be that no hippies are running this country because very few people actually want that? Chumpski?? Really?

Well, that's a silly untrue statement. And it probably represents simplistic stoned hippie thinking (hey, I love weed too). Sure if you poll people and ask would they rather the US kill people or not, people will respond with a resounding no. If you phrase the question, should the US protect her interests and those of her allies with force if necessary, you'll get a much different response. The reason people like you who read too much Chompski never run for office is because if you ever stepped into the real world you'd see things aren't as you think they are. Huge corporate conspiracies don't exist (how could they, the NSA can't even keep secrets). Yes, resources play a role, but not in the demented way you think.

Anyway, you're free to vote and play an active role in government, even spread ill-conceived notions of how you think the world works on internet forums, but while you're spouting silly notions that everyone is just stupid and doesn't understand they're just brainwashed, maybe look at yourselves and see which is more probable: hundreds if millions of people are being actively duped, or perhaps you're misinterpreting your facts.

I didn't say a word about change or Chomsky. Did you mean to put my name in that post?

I assumed you were as nutty as Heehaww with your 10000 to 1 collateral damage comment.

Oh you English are SO superior aren't you? Well, would you like to know where you'd be without US the good old U.S. of A. to protect you? I'll tell you. The smallest ****ing province in the Russian Empire, that's where! So DON'T call me stupid, lady. Just THANK me! ...If it wasn't for us, you'd all be speaking German, singing, "Deutschland, Deutschland über alles!"

-Otto